The Honors Program AI Policy, approved by the Honors Program Committee in February 2026, governs how students may use generative and agentic AI tools in their Honors coursework.

The policy reflects the program’s core belief that the process of reading, researching, and writing is where critical thinking develops. Because of this, the program does not support using AI in ways that skip or replace those processes.

However, professors may design assignments where AI legitimately enhances learning — and in those cases, students must disclose their use.

The Honors Program curriculum is built around developing foundational critical thinking, reading, and communication skills that students need to navigate a complex information landscape. The program believes these skills are best developed through the challenging, hands-on work of figuring out what to say and how to say it — without shortcuts.

This philosophy shapes the program’s stricter default stance on AI, even where other DePaul courses may take a more permissive approach.

Yes — this policy applies to all courses offered under the University Honors Program. The disclosure requirement is universal across all Honors classes.

What differs course to course is how much (if any) AI use your professor permits. Those specifics will always be stated in the course syllabus.

It depends on your professor. The policy does not ban AI outright, but it also does not permit it by default. Each instructor decides the extent to which AI is allowed — and will state this clearly in the syllabus.

If the syllabus is silent on AI, treat that as “not permitted” and ask your professor to clarify before using any tools.

The policy covers a broad range of AI tools, including:

• Large language model chatbots (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini)
• AI writing assistants (e.g., Grammarly, CoPilot)
• AI research or summarization tools
• AI brainstorming, outlining, or idea-generation tools
• Any other tool that uses AI to assist in any stage of completing an assignment

Even minor uses — like using Grammarly to check grammar — must be disclosed if your professor’s syllabus requires disclosure (which is the default expectation).

Yes. Professors are allowed to design assignments that intentionally incorporate AI as a learning tool. For example, an instructor might ask students to use an AI chatbot to explore a concept and then critically evaluate its responses.

In all such cases, students must still disclose exactly how they used AI in their disclosure statement.

Any time you use an AI tool in completing an Honors assignment, you must attach a disclosure statement to your submission. This statement should explain:

• Which tool(s) you used (e.g., ChatGPT, Grammarly)
• How you used them (e.g., brainstorming, outlining, drafting, editing, researching)
• To what end — what role did the tool play in your work?

A disclosure statement is required even when AI use is explicitly permitted by your professor.

Yes. The policy specifically names Grammarly and CoPilot as examples of tools that must be disclosed. Although Grammarly may feel like a basic utility, it uses AI to make writing suggestions and is explicitly covered by this policy.

When in doubt: if the tool uses AI in any capacity, disclose it. It’s always safer to over-disclose than under-disclose.

There is no “de minimis” exception. Even a small use of AI — checking a sentence’s grammar, generating a list to skim for inspiration — must be disclosed. The policy applies to any use of AI tools, however minor.

Your disclosure statement should be proportionate: a brief, accurate description of the small role the tool played is all that’s needed.

Failure to disclose AI use — even when the use itself would have been permitted — will be reported to DePaul’s Academic Integrity Board as an academic integrity violation.

This is true regardless of whether your professor allowed AI use on the assignment. The act of concealing AI use is itself the violation.

For details on the university’s academic integrity process and potential penalties, see DePaul’s Academic Integrity Policy.

Yes. The Honors Program policy is that AI use is not permitted by default — professors must affirmatively permit it in the syllabus. If your syllabus doesn’t address AI, the default assumption is that it is not permitted.

Always check your syllabus and, if you’re uncertain, ask your professor directly before using any AI tools.

Great — you’re in the clear, but you still need to include a disclosure statement. Describe what you used (ChatGPT), what you asked it to do (generate initial ideas), and how that influenced your work. Example:

Reach out to your professor as soon as possible. Be honest about what tools you used and how. Professors are best positioned to assess the situation, and transparency now is always better than a potential integrity issue later.

If the use wasn’t permitted, your professor can advise on next steps — which may include revising or resubmitting the work.

The policy governs AI use in completing assignments. Using AI on your own time, purely to help you understand material (not to complete coursework), is a different situation — but even here, caution is warranted.

If you have questions about where the line is for a specific course, ask your professor. They can clarify what counts as “completing an assignment” versus personal learning in their class.