Cornelius Vanderbilt planted the seed of his eponymous University with a modest $1 million gift. The value of the dollar is not the only radical change that has occurred since the school’s founding in 1873. Technology has also progressed leaps and bounds, with consumer-grade artificial intelligence (AI) thoroughly transforming academic life at Vandy.

Just as Cornelius leveraged emerging technologies (steamboats and railroads) as a means of production, Vanderbilt University students have used artificial intelligence to their advantage. The wisest students have adapted their use of AI to their instructors’ policies—policies that can vary significantly from one course to the next.

The seeds of Vanderbilt University fell from the fruits of innovation. It would seem wrong for any instructor to stifle students’ use of a technology that promises to drive innovation, as AI does. However, there are limits on how students can use AI, and anyone accused of violating those boundaries may face severe disciplinary action.

If you or your student faces an allegation of AI misconduct at Vanderbilt, call the LLF National Law Firm Education Law Team today at 888-535-3686 or contact us online to discuss how we can help.

Does Vandy Have School-Wide Guidance on Students’ Use of AI?

As one of the premier universities in the Southern United States, Vanderbilt is a school that fosters and exudes confidence. The school’s generative AI policies exhibit confidence in instructors’ judgment, first and foremost, and some school-wide AI guidelines include:

  • Instructors write the policies: Vandy’s AI policy approach mirrors the robber baron spirit of making one’s own rules. The school “empowers instructors to establish their own policies on the use of generative AI in the classroom.” It’s imperative that Commodores know thy instructor, and know what they think about your use of ChatGPT and other AI resources.
  • The Vanderbilt Honor Code reigns supreme: While Vanderbilt’s higher-ups empower instructors to “determine how or if” students can use AI in their work, there is a caveat. Every instructor’s AI usage policy must exist “within the guidelines of the Honor Code.”
  • In the absence of a clear policy, students can use generative AI: This is a rarity. At most schools, students are expected to refrain from using AI in the absence of a clear AI usage policy from their instructor. Not so at Vandy, where “the university permits students to use generative AI tools” when an instructor does not provide clear guidelines. The compromise is that the student must proactively disclose how they used AI in their work.
  • Conversation fosters clarity: While instructors are expected to have an AI-specific syllabus statement, the smart policymakers at Vanderbilt encourage more. School-wide AI guidance urges instructors to “consider having a conversation with your students about generative AI tools at the beginning of the semester and throughout the semester, as needed, to ensure clarity.” This advice is equally applicable to students, who should approach their instructors with any AI-specific questions or concerns.

When in doubt about the rules of AI use, turning to Vanderbilt’s Honor Code and having a conversation with your instructor are wise courses of action.

If your instructor cannot or will not clarify how you can (or can’t) use AI, you should first ensure your use comports with the Honor Code. If your actions align with the Honor Code, you may use AI so long as you disclose your AI use when submitting the assignment.

How Does Vanderbilt Respond to Suspicions of AI Misconduct?

Vanderbilt’s Student Behavioral Procedures explain how an AI misconduct complaint may be resolved:

  1. The report is filed: The office that handles misconduct complaints at Vandy is referred to as “Student Accountability.” This is the office that will initiate any formal investigation of any AI misconduct complaint.
  2. An investigation happens: If Student Accountability deems the complaint worth investigating, it will investigate. The accused student will be notified of the complaint, the pending investigation, and their rights.
  3. The case may be informally resolved: Vandy policy notes that Student Accountability can informally resolve some cases through warnings and notices. It is the “sole discretion” of Student Accountability whether a complaint is resolved informally or referred for a formal resolution.
  4. The case may proceed to a hearing: Misconduct complaints referred for a formal resolution typically proceed to a hearing. Vanderbilt’s Honor Council officiates these proceedings, which should give all parties the opportunity to present their respective arguments and cases. Vanderbilt employs both Full Panel and Small Panel hearings, which may involve different procedures and implications. These are the kinds of details we will help you grasp and adapt to throughout disciplinary proceedings.
  5. The student may appeal: If a Vanderbilt student is penalized for AI misconduct, they will consult with a Student Accountability staff member. That staff member will inform them of their right to appeal and the procedures for doing so.

You will likely need to make critical decisions throughout this process, from whether to speak with an investigator to how to present your case at a hearing. We will help you make the right decision every time one arises.

Vanderbilt’s Student Behavioral Policies authorize severe discipline for academic misconduct. From a formal reprimand that is a glaring blemish on your record, to dismissal that dashes your dream of graduating from Vandy (and spoils the fruits that a degree would produce), you should take each of these disciplinary threats seriously.

How Should I Respond to an Allegation of AI Misconduct at Vandy?

If ever there was a time to Anchor Down, craft a plan, and prepare to fight in your own defense, it’s when you are accused of AI misconduct.

Our Student Defense Team has helped many students batten down the hatches in advance of high-stakes disciplinary proceedings. Even if you ultimately choose to accept fault for AI misconduct, you should do so strategically. Do not simply settle for whatever disciplinary decision comes your way.

We can help you determine what a fair outcome would be in your case. We will then help you urgently pursue that outcome, which may require us to negotiate with Vanderbilt’s general counsel

Call the LLF National Law Firm Education Law Team today at 888-535-3686 or contact us online. AI misconduct accusations always require an urgent response, so do not wait.

Tennessee

Tell About Your Case

Zero-Tolerance Discipline Policies Can Undermine Students’ Due Process Rights

Colleges and universities have broad authority to maintain campus safety and enforce student conduct policies. However, students accused of misconduct don’t lose their due process rights simply because allegations are serious. At the higher education level, courts have repeatedly recognized that suspension and expulsion can have life-changing academic and professional consequences. As […]

Stopping Expulsions in California: Secondary Findings a Potent Defense

It’s the phone call that every parent dreads: your child has allegedly committed a serious offense at school and is facing the possibility of expulsion. Expulsion is a serious and lasting mark on a student’s record. However, California law requires that schools meet a very high standard before expelling students […]

Can Your Search History Bring You Down? How Schools Can Use Search Histories as Evidence of Misconduct

Students at Princeton University are drawing attention to the school’s policies and access related to students’ search histories on their devices. An article in the Daily Princetonian points out the ways that the university can use students’ search histories as evidence of cheating or other misconduct. Students are worried that […]

When the School Becomes the Problem: What UNC’s Botched Investigation Teaches Every Student

A University of North Carolina (UNC) student lost his scholarship and was permanently expelled from the entire UNC system after the school found him responsible for sexual misconduct. Years of federal litigation followed. And then, quietly, UNC settled. The former student, identified in court records as Jacob Doe, argued that […]