91ĹÝÜ˝

Transform the SFU Experience

Clarity, transparency and learning first: SFU faculty share their strategies for responding to AI in the classroom

September 03, 2025

As AI reshapes higher education, SFU instructors are exploring diverse ways to address its use in their courses. Their syllabus statements set boundaries while opening dialogue about what responsible and meaningful use looks like across disciplines. 

Computing science lecturer Victor Cheung encourages students to use AI to support their learning but cautions against relying on it for assignments—a balance that sparks valuable discussion.  

“It’s a tool—use it to support your learning, not stunt it. If students are struggling with a concept, I encourage them to use AI to deepen their understanding, not replace it. Otherwise, they risk putting their future careers in jeopardy by becoming replaceable by the very tool that they have grown complete reliance on. What’s powerful about this approach is that it gets students to think critically about how and when they use AI. Our class has many conversations about what’s appropriate and what isn’t—and for me, that’s the real goal: helping students become critical thinkers about AI and the world.” 

See Cheung’s syllabus statement.

CHAT GPT Use of ChatGPT or Other AI Tools

As mentioned in the class, we are aware of them. I see them as helpers/tutors from which you can look for inspiration. However, these tools are not reliable and they tend to be overly confident about their answers, sometimes even incorrect. It is also very easy to grow a reliance to them and put yourself at risk of not actually learning anything and even committing academic dishonesty. Other issues include: 

  • When it comes to uncertainty, you won’t know how to determine what is correct.

  • If you need to modify or fine tune your answer, you won’t know what to do. 

  • You will not be able to learn the materials and thus will not be able to apply what you learn in situations where no external help is available, for example, during exams and interviews.

For introductory level courses and less sophisticated questions, it is likely that you’ll get an almost perfect answer from these tools. But keep in mind if you can get the answer, everyone can also get the answer. Bottom line is, if you ask these tools to give you an answer and you use the answer as yours, you are committing academic dishonesty by claiming work that is not done by you as yours. In particular, do not copy & paste the questions, in part or in whole, and have these tools give you the answers. 

Note that different instructors might have different policies regarding the use of these tools. Check with them before you proceed with assignments from other courses

Biomedical physiology and kinesiology professor Dave Clarke takes a similar approach, drawing clear lines around when AI use is appropriate and when it is not.

“I tell students that AI can be a valuable tool for generating ideas and providing direction. But if it’s used to produce entire responses, it short-circuits the learning process. In our discipline, the ability to find, read, analyze, and understand verified knowledge is foundational. If students bypass that process, they will leave our program ill-prepared to address real-world challenges—and ultimately, that’s a detriment to everyone.” 

See Clarke’s syllabus statement.

Use of Generative AI software: Generative AI can help you generate ideas and possibly to find sources of information. It can be used as a tool, but the standards of academic work apply. Your responses must be written in your own words and refer specifically to the information provided in the question, reference materials, scholarly references, and the course lecture notes. In citing a source, you are affirming that you have read the source, understood the material, and cited it faithfully. Citing generative AI software as a source of information is inappropriate; it is a pattern matcher, not “information.”

For English lecturer Nicky Didicher, the priority is helping students grapple with the reality of AI. She invites them to use it in their assignments—so long as they are transparent about their prompts and revision process.  

“Whatever their future career, our students are going to be using AI. One way I try to help them build this skill is by offering the option to complete creative writing assignments with AI—on the condition that they document their process and don’t let the tool write the entire piece. In a larger, lower-division class, this approach works well because it opens space for dialogue about transparency and responsibility in AI use. It’s not a perfect system—I still find some students turning to AI even when they’ve chosen the ‘no AI’ stream. But what it does do is help students confront the impact of AI on their futures as learners and workers.”

See Didicher's syllabus statement.

You are permitted to use text-generating AI such as Microsoft Copilot, ChatGPT, Grammarly, or Gemini Pro as writing support for your report and analysis assignment, provided you acknowledge what AI(s) you use and how, and your own contributions to the work are more significant than those of the AI; you are required to use AI as writing support for your plan and sample assignment—see details here

You should be aware that ChatGPT and other text-generating AIs fabricate information such as facts and quotations (so avoid using them for research or make sure to check everything they give you); you should also be aware that if you put your work into an AI other than Copilot accessed through SFU’s Microsoft 365, then you are giving your intellectual property to the company without credit or compensation. 

Health sciences professor Ralph Pantophlet also emphasizes building a culture of dialogue about AI use.

“I tell my students that if they want to use AI, I’m open to the possibility—but they first need to think through how they plan to use it and get permission. This signals to them that I’m not here to police or forbid behaviors, but rather to create a collaborative classroom environment. Over the term, if I notice that a student or group seems to be relying too heavily on AI, my TAs or I will have a conversation with them. Almost always, the behavior changes—and I believe that’s because I’ve been transparent and collaborative with them from the start.” 

See Pantophlet’s syllabus statement.

Generative AI tools: Students may use ChatGPT and other generative AI assistants for assignments in this class but must receive permission from the instructor first. Permission must be requested via Canvas email at least seven days ahead of the assignment due date and include the following:

a) how does the student plan to use these tools specifically, and 

b) how will the student indicate the use of the tool in their work?

Failure to obtain permission from the instructor will be considered a violation of SFU’s Academic Integrity policies and will be investigated accordingly. 

Health sciences professor David Whitehurst permits the use of AI with proper attribution but emphasizes that students are equally welcome to avoid it. His main goal, he explains, is to acknowledge that AI use is a new and evolving practice. 

“It’s important for me to let students know that, at least for now, there is no expectation that they must use AI. As a student, I would have been a slow adopter—just as I am as a researcher and instructor—and I wanted to ensure that students like me wouldn’t feel anxious or disadvantaged. My priority is to provide clarity. I know that best practices will continue to evolve and that there will be better ways to integrate AI into assignments. But for now, what matters most is that I’ve set clear expectations, outlined responsibilities, and acknowledged that AI is something we are all still learning to navigate.”

See Whitehurst's syllabus statement.

Guidance about the use of generative AI software (e.g., ChatGPT)

Much of the first paragraph been adapted from the guidance developed by the University of Jyväskylä (; last accessed August 25th, 2025)

AI-based text editors or text generators, so-called large language models, are interactive AI applications that produce text based on user input. There has been much discussion about the use of language models in higher education, as they offer an obvious opportunity to cheat by writing essay answers with the help of AI or by rewriting plagiarized text. However, language models are likely to be integrated with word processor software in the future and may well be standard applications you will use in your employment following graduation. Therefore, there is no outright ban on their use for Midterm #1. The use of generative artificial intelligence tools is permitted for this assignment, with proper attribution (see below).

One thing that generative AI does not change is that you, the student, is always responsible for the text you are submitting. As explained in the course syllabus, the instructor and Teaching Assistants will assume that students have a familiarity with the norms of plagiarism; all students should be aware of SFU’s Academic Honesty and Student Conduct Policies ().

The use of generative AI is not mandatory, neither is it necessarily recommended. A key aspect of Unit 1 (and, therefore, Midterm #1), is to develop an understanding of foundational concepts that will be necessary to do well in the other HSCI 206 assignments (e.g., in-person quizzes and the in-person final examination). AI is a means for gathering information and, in that way, it is no different to the Internet, the books in the library, or a conversation with the instructor during Office Hours. It is your decision how you use available information and how best to develop your knowledge of economics throughout the semester.

Attribution of AI tools in your assignment

When using material generated from an AI tool in an assignment, it is important that your use is transparent and appropriately referenced. When selecting your chosen referencing style (see page 1 of the assignment), it is advisable to see what citation guidelines are provided for citing AI-generated materials.

In addition to appropriate referencing within the assignment text, you are required to include (i) the prompt(s) used to generate a response; (ii) the name and version of the AI software used; (iii) the date(s) the prompt was used; and (iv) a copy of the response(s) generated by the software. All this information should be provided in a separate section at the end of the

These examples show that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to AI in teaching. What unites these instructors is their focus on clarity, transparency, and student learning—whether that means encouraging experimentation, setting limits or requiring disclosure.  

For more information on SFU-wide guidance on AI in learning and teaching, view the Artificial Intelligence in Learning and Teaching Task Force page, part of SFU’s AI Strategy.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
SMS
Email
Copy