This resource provides guidance around the procedures and responsibilities for instructors in identifying and addressing potential AI-related academic offences, in alignment with Memorial’s broader Academic Misconduct Regulations.
What is unauthorized use?
Unauthorized use is any use of GenAI that does not align with the expectations an instructor establishes in their course, specific assessment and/or course activity. It is the responsibility of the instructor to clarify these expectations in the course syllabus and in other relevant instructions they provide. These expectations should also make transparent approaches that are considered for detecting unauthorized use (i.e. use of detection tools).
Clarity in Course Expectations:
- Communicate clearly in your syllabi (see 6.7.2 Course Syllabus and Generative Artificial Intelligence Syllabus Statements), assignment descriptions, or class discussions.
- Indicate whether AI tools are permitted or prohibited. If permitted, note the extent of acceptable use (e.g., idea generation vs. content creation).
- Share resources on how to properly cite AI-generated content, with recommended formats (e.g., AI: Citation, attribution, acknowledgement).
Transparency in Detection Methods:
- As per Memorial’s Statement on Generative AI, the use of GenAI detection tools is not recommended.
- If you choose to use AI-detection software to identify suspected inappropriate use, students must be informed about its use and must be given the opportunity to opt out.
- The limitations of the tools should be acknowledged, as detectors are not conclusive evidence but can support a broader investigation.
- Any such use must be consistent with other university policies (e.g., Privacy and Electronic Data Security), which do not permit sharing student information with unauthorized outside agencies.
Additional Resource: Issues with GenAI Detection
Reporting and Adjudication
Before submitting a report of academic misconduct, instructors should review the appropriate official procedure:
- For Undergraduate students: 6.12.3 General Procedure
- For Graduate Students: 4.12.3 General Procedure
Note:
In the case of minor offences, there should be an attempt to resolve the allegations at the instructor level.
Once sufficient evidence is gathered and an initial discussion with the student has taken place (if applicable), you may choose to bring forward a case for adjudication. The adjudication process will be consistent with Memorial University Academic Misconduct Procedures.
Evidence of AI Use
As part of the reporting process, instructors will need to provide strong evidence to support a report of academic misconduct.
One of the strongest forms of evidence of unauthorized AI use would be the student’s inability to explain or reproduce submitted works upon request. Meeting with that student (in person if possible) and asking questions about specific parts of the work can yield valuable insights into whether they completed that work on their own.
Other examples of possible evidence:
- Identification of fabricated references/quotations/other data in the work.
- AI detector results (as supporting, not sole evidence).
- Demonstrated inconsistencies in student work (i.e. comparison of other submitted works) / Lack of alignment with past performance.
- Use of more common words/phrasing or bland expressions or inappropriate/unnecessary verbosity.
- Absence of specific information students were required to include (e.g. key references; reference to in-class discussions).
Additional resources are available to help you when Recognizing Possible Use of Generative AI.
Originally Published: August 17, 2026
