Artificial Intelligence Usage Policy
Understanding what is an acceptable usage of artificial intelligence is essential to the students formation.
The rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has created new opportunities for learning, research, and academic support in ministry. Tools such as ChatGPT and other AI platforms can assist students in locating sources, clarifying concepts, and exploring ideas. However, these tools also present significant challenges to academic integrity when used improperly.
This policy exists to provide clear guidance on the appropriate use of AI at Queens College of Theology. QCT agrees that while AI may serve as a helpful aid in the learning process, it must never replace the intellectual work, personal reflection, and original expression expected of each student.
Education is not simply the production of written work, but the formation of understanding, wisdom, and character. Therefore, this policy seeks to ensure that student work remains an authentic representation of each individual’s learning and engagement.
Philosophy of AI Use in Ministry Education
Artificial intelligence should be understood as a supporting tool, not a substitute for student authorship.
Students are expected to engage deeply with course material, think critically, and communicate in their own voice. The use of AI to generate content undermines this process and compromises both the integrity of the assignment and the educational development of the student.
While AI can assist in gathering information or sparking ideas, the responsibility for interpreting, synthesizing, and presenting that information rests fully with the student.
Acceptable Uses of AI
Students may use AI tools in ways that support research and learning without replacing their own academic work. Appropriate uses include assistance in locating and identifying credible sources, such as peer-reviewed journal articles, books, and primary texts. AI may also be used to help students better understand complex topics, define unfamiliar terms, or explore the broader context of a subject.
For example, a student may ask an AI tool to suggest scholarly articles related to a particular topic or to provide a list of sources for further reading. Similarly, a student may use AI to clarify a concept discussed in one of their classes or to generate questions that guide further research.
In these cases, AI functions as a research assistant, pointing the student toward resources and understanding but does not produce the work that the student ultimately submits.
Unacceptable Uses of AI
The use of AI to generate academic content that is submitted as a student’s own work is strictly prohibited. This includes, but is not limited to, having AI write paragraphs, essays, discussion responses, or reflections. It also includes generating thesis statements, constructing arguments, or rewriting content in a way that obscures its origin.
Particularly in disciplines that require personal interpretation, such as biblical studies, theology, or reflective writing, the use of AI to produce content is a direct violation of the purpose of the assignment. These tasks are designed to develop the student’s own understanding, voice, and critical engagement.
For example, prompting an AI tool to write a paragraph on the historical context of a biblical passage and its application to a specific argument would be considered misuse. Even if the content is edited or rephrased, the original intellectual work was not produced by the student and therefore does not meet academic standards.
Academic Integrity and AI Detection
The college employs plagiarism and AI-detection tools, including Turnitin, as part of its commitment to academic integrity. These systems are capable of identifying patterns consistent with AI-generated content.
If a submitted assignment contains more than 10% AI-generated content, as indicated by these tools, it will be flagged for further review. A flagged submission does not automatically result in disciplinary action, but it does initiate a process in which the work is carefully evaluated. Additionally, Queens College of Theology will not argue or debate whether a students work is original. The detection tools that QCT invests have been proven correct in every independent study, and the school will ultimately side with the detection software.
Students may be asked to explain their work, provide drafts or notes, or demonstrate their understanding of the material. If it is determined that AI was used inappropriately, the case will be referred for disciplinary review in accordance with the college’s academic integrity policies.
Consequences may include a failing grade on the assignment, penalties within the course, or additional academic sanctions depending on the severity and frequency of the violation. Please review the academic standing policy to understand your next steps in the event you are referred for disciplinary review.
Student Responsibility
Each student bears the responsibility of ensuring that all submitted work reflects their own intellectual effort. This includes maintaining honesty in the use of sources, properly citing references, and adhering to the guidelines outlined in this policy.
Students should approach AI with discernment, recognizing both its usefulness and its limitations. When uncertainty arises regarding whether a particular use of AI is appropriate, students are encouraged to seek clarification from their instructor before proceeding.
Conclusion
The college recognizes that AI is an evolving technology that will continue to shape the academic landscape. This policy is not intended to discourage the use of helpful tools, but to ensure that such tools are used in ways that support, rather than replace, genuine learning.