The University of Calgary promotes an AI-forward future leading into the 2026 fall semester. While advocates believe there needs to be a stronger regulatory framework.
When asked about the creation of a regulation policy, the University of Calgary shared the Use of AI and Automated Systems and the Information Security Classification Standard to the Gauntlet as an available guideline and policy resource.
The Use of AI and Automated Systems, informs of several guiding principles located on various website pages stating acceptable terms of use for permissible AI utilization on campus.
The institutional policies and guidelines section highlights factors to consider when using AI in academics such as privacy and ethical application pertaining to the input of personal information, an emphasis on AI usage observing human oversight to ensure impartial output and an advisory recommendation to only use secure and institutionally approved AI tools such as Microsoft Copilot Chat.
Additionally, it also recommends exercising caution and securing consent when using or inputting sensitive information into AI systems; ensuring permission and considering intellectual property rights, utilizing transparency and disclosure with regard to AI outputs, and lastly encourages using AI systems in line with laws and the universities Information Security Classification Standard. The document was made effective on April 17th, 2017 but includes no information regarding recent revisions.
The concern for stronger AI policies arises at a time where the University of Calgary has claimed a top five spot in research rankings gaining $588.5M in research revenue in the 2023-2024 fiscal year.
Other Canadian Universities such as the University of Alberta, prompt instructors to pick an AI statement created by the university to include in their course syllabus outlining permissible or non permissible AI usage to limit student confusion and set expectations. They also promote the non-disclosure of AI usage as a clear violation of academic integrity and encourage instructors to inquire as to how AI was used.
The University of Victoria website includes resources for AI inquiry under the Academic Misconduct section which include an advisory newsletter outlining how to use ChatGPT [A popular AI system among students] responsibly with risks highlighted.
In an official response to the Gauntlet, the University of Calgary said “Incorporation of AI-generated content or AI tools and platforms for learning should enhance the learning experience for students. UCalgary is committed to ensuring generative AI use offers meaningful learning outcomes for students.”
The Gauntlet spoke with Student Union (SU) Vice President Academic (VPA) Zoe Zeritsch, an honours biochemistry student, whose 2026 election campaign included the push for an introduction of AI policies.
“[the SU’s] standpoint is that AI should be used as a tool and not adopted for adoption's sake. In general, AI should not be a replacement for human work, and we hold that very strongly,” Zeritsch explained.
Zeritsch expressed concern for a lack of consistency with regard to current AI usage in classroom use on campus.
“On campus, AI runs rampant a lot of the time, and sometimes it is used constructively, and sometimes it is very much so not. Guidelines, as I said before, are guidelines. People either follow them, follow them very closely, or they do not,” Zeritsch said.
Zeritsch also shared unease over Intellectual Property Rights (IP) and the privacy of students and argues a restriction is needed for AI usage in classrooms especially pertaining to instructor use.
“In terms of privacy, having restrictions regarding putting student information, primarily their intellectual property, into AI platforms,” she stated.
Graduate Student’s Association (GSA) President, Jacob Amengor, a PhD Student in Environmental Engineering at Schulich said the position of the GSA is to find a reasonable threshold for AI usage, stating, “to make sure that people get socialized [to AI] in a good way when it comes to teaching and learning and research.”
He shared that AI has come to stay and implementing a “hard stop” would not work as he states available resources used for research largely have AI components.
Amengor also said the provincial government should play a role in AI usage stating resources are necessary.
“In my opinion, I find that the university is having a challenge setting a clear policy on how AI should be used in teaching and learning, it's a terrain that is changing very fast, and tomorrow there are new systems.”
“The government should be willing to provide the resources that those institutions need to be able to implement those broad policies that are set,” Amengor continued, “If you want institute measures that ensure that students and professors are using it in the right way, you need to implement some sort of capital infrastructure to be able to do that,”
Additional resources through the University of Calgary's Generative AI (GenAI) in Teaching and Learning site states, “the University of Calgary supports the use of generative AI in teaching and learning,” which expresses an AI-forward future in education embracing and recognizing “the transformative potential of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in teaching and learning innovation and future-focused programs.”
They say their commitment to ensuring the “transformation” is reached ethically, responsibly and in accordance with values expressed in their Ahead of Tomorrow Strategic Plan,, the university's four step, seven year plan addressing growth. Also stated in the resource is the universities commitment to adjusting and adapting their approach as AI grows and evolves.
Amengor shared an advantageous aspect of AI usage in Graduate studies that has proven to save time when researching papers and journals.
“Now with AI use, you are able to get those papers just by a click of a button. It arranges the papers for you in the years that they were written and all the years that the research was done.”
He noted students are able to read more papers than they ever could electronically compared to past research forms of sifting through hard copies in the library. “So that is one of the positive ways that graduate students can use AI,” Amengor said.
In terms of beneficial student AI usage, Zeritsch noted positive utilization could include compiling notes and spell check but aired caution to “not take its suggestions as fact” and monitor wording and punctuation.
The teaching and learning resource states “Individual educators and course instructors should determine if and how generative AI will be incorporated into their course design, activities and assessments,” and “Expectations on the use of AI should be clearly communicated to students including if and to what extent the use of generative AI is acceptable. Communications to students should be included in the course outline, verbally in-class and in assessment descriptions,” declares the website.
The University of Calgary told the Gauntlet, they don’t believe AI usage in classrooms should be uniform, stating, “Individual educators and course instructors determine if and how AI will be incorporated into their course design, activities and assessments. These decisions may differ between classes, assignments and the student learning requirements and outcomes of individual classes. This approach is in alignment with many reputable higher education institutions in North America.”
The two student representatives Zeritsch and Agmenor shared the same belief that AI usage should not be uniform at the University.
Agmenor said uniformity in policy would be impractical due to varying context, “How AI should be regulated in undergrad studies should be different from how it's regulated when it comes to graduate studies. So definitely, you cannot have a uniform guideline or uniform regulation.”
“I don't think so, personally,” stated Zeritsch. “Every faculty is so different. It's hard to create a singular policy for every single faculty.”
“And all I can say is that I think that when AI is used, it should be used in a way that doesn't harm our students' development and that allows them to learn instead of supplementing and kind of starting at stage three instead of the stage one,” Zeritsch told the Gauntlet.
The teaching and learning resource further employs instructors with courses allowing AI usage to use a 5 point guiding principle framework:
- Meaningful Learning: Emphasis on ensuring AI generated content enhances and provides a meaningful learning experience for students.
- Academic Integrity: Ensuring academic integrity, a core value of the university; is upheld and any AI usage should adhere to existing policies.
- Access: Ensuring equal accessibility of AI platforms and tools to students so they may be used for learning.
- Transparency and Accountability: Instructors should disclose and communicate when and how they are using AI content. And communicate where AI tools may be applicably used, highlighting the ethics, strengths and other considerations of the technology.
- Data and Privacy: Highlights UCalgary's commitment to protecting the privacy of student work encouraging instructors to adhere to privacy laws.
“UCalgary emphasizes the importance of maintaining academic integrity as a core
value of our institution. The use of generative AI tools by students, faculty, or staff
should adhere to our existing academic integrity policies,” shared the University to the Gauntlet.
Zeritsch argued students should hold themselves accountable for academic integrity amid AI capabilities but the University should explore other assignments avoiding the potential use of AI entirely.
“Personally, I think that all students should have a sense of academic integrity for themselves in terms of holding up that framework,” Zeritsch said. “I'd love to see alternative assessments be explored that can avoid the use of AI and avoid the possibility of academic integrity being compromised due to AI.”
She also states that there is a clear call for concern with student development and abilities being lost to AI usage in classrooms, mentioning studies on cognitive development with AI usage in ranging ages of students.
“I've seen like students turn to AI almost instantly when they get an assignment or when they need to start working on a project, and like I said before, I don't think we should be adopting AI for adoption's sake, and having it as a primary tool shouldn't really be the best mode here,” she said.
“We want to make sure that our graduates are skilled and developed, and are learned in what the topic they need to be learned in. And with AI and with the University of Calgary not producing any regulations around AI, like studies have shown, this cognitive development is on major decline for those who are using AI, and we're starting to see it in University of Calgary as well.” Zeritch told the Gauntlet.
Amengor agrees there is a concern for student skills pertaining to AI usage.
“When the students tend to rely on AI use for everything without exercising their intellectual capacity, then there is a challenge whether the student is going to understand what the professor wants them to know, or what the industry needs from the academic institutions,” he said.
“So definitely, we should have some sort of guidelines or policy or regulation about AI use, so that we don't impact the students' ability to understand what is being taught, and also the ability to build the skills that they need for the industry,” Amengor told the Gauntlet.
Both student representatives at the undergrad and graduate level put forward their considerations for AI regulation on the University Campus arguing conversations and work needs to be done to account for these pressing matters.
Zeritch told the Gauntlet that AI is fast-moving which may be the reason behind a lack of rules.
“The main response that I get from the University of Calgary so far is that AI moves so quickly. I've heard from from faculty that it's kind of hard to catch a policy that encompassates this fast, very growing technology change,” she said, “I think that they are trying to be a little bit too granular, and having a standard policy that is about more of the technology as a whole rather than specific actions that you can take in AI would be more the approach that would be better to follow.”
She said she wasn’t sure as to why the University has not employed a policy other than the available resources.
“I am not sure why they haven't put a policy in place other than those points. But all I'm hoping for is that they may consider my points this year, and hopefully, I can do something to change that,” stated Zeritch.
Amengor told the Gauntlet deep conversations about regulation are needed, “that is the only way that we can set up the right systems to be able to manage this properly.”
Despite AI’s growing capabilities and advantages, the available sources and advocates recommend that students should use the technology in a responsible manner maintaining awareness of consequences such as academic misconduct and consider prioritizing critical thinking and intellectual capacity in their studies.
