Signed GenAI Contract for Lab Learning

Professor Nirusha Thavarajah is an Associate Professor in the Teaching Stream in Physical and Environmental Sciences at the University of Toronto Scarborough. She holds a Ph.D. in Synthetic Organic Chemistry, an LL.M. in Intellectual Property Law, and an M.Ed. in Higher Education, and teaches chemistry courses including Organic Chemistry and Advanced Bio-Organic Chemistry. Prof. Thavarajah has integrated generative AI into her teaching by using structured exercises where students critically evaluate AI-generated responses, fostering analytical thinking and deeper comprehension of course material. To maintain academic integrity, she has restructured lab assessments by shifting online post-lab reports and quizzes to in-person settings completed during lab time. This approach prioritizes active learning while minimizing reliance on AI for assessments.

Nirusha Thavarajah Associate Professor, Teaching Stream, Department of Physical & Environmental Sciences

Objectives

As part of CHMA10’s (Winter 2026) comprehensive laboratory safety and academic integrity framework, this separate Generative AI Usage Contract aimed to provide clear, context-specific guidance about AI tools while acknowledging their complex role in modern education. Unlike blanket prohibitions or complete freedom, the contract establishes nuanced boundaries that recognize AI can serve as a legitimate learning aid for certain tasks (visualization, organization) while undermining learning objectives for others (original analysis, critical thinking).

By creating a dedicated contract separate from the Academic Integrity Contract, the course signals that AI use is not inherently dishonest but requires thoughtful judgment about appropriateness. The contract explicitly permits AI for the concept map activity, while prohibiting it for reflective writing, teaching students to distinguish between tasks where AI scaffolds learning versus tasks requiring authentic intellectual engagement. Students must document all AI prompts used, fostering transparency and metacognitive awareness.

The goal of this contract is to help students develop ethical decision-making skills around emerging technologies, which is essential for professional scientific practice, while maintaining the intellectual rigor, originality, and critical thinking that define genuine scientific understanding.

Process

The policy was implemented as a required, signed contract with clear consequences for violations. The steps included:

Step 1: Distribute Lab Policy on Generative AI Usage Contract

Students receive the contract as part of lab manual introduction section (page 25)
Contract is distributed alongside (but separate from) Academic Integrity Contract and Lab Safety Rules Contract
Instructor emphasizes during first lab meeting that AI policy is distinct because AI can be both helpful and harmful depending on context

Step 2: Review Permitted and Prohibited AI Uses

Permitted: Students may use Microsoft Copilot to create the concept map for Experiment 2, documenting all prompts
Prohibited: Students may not use generative AI for:
- The 250-300 word critical reflection in Experiment 2
- Any other lab report sections (calculations, discussions, conclusions)
- Pre-lab quiz responses or notebook preparation
Instructor explains rationale: AI can help visualize procedural steps but cannot develop critical thinking or original analysis

Step 3: Clarify Documentation Requirements

Students must document ALL prompts used for the permitted concept map activity
Documentation should include: original prompt, refined prompts, and brief notes about what each prompt aimed to improve
This documentation will be submitted as part of the Experiment 2 assignment

Step 4: Explain Consequences for Violations

Unauthorized AI use (e.g., AI-generated reflection) results in automatic zero for that component
Serious or repeated violations may result in additional academic penalties under the university’s academic integrity policy
Contract emphasizes that violations are treated as policy breaches, not moral failures, but consequences are enforced consistently

Step 5: Student Declaration and Submission

Students read contract thoroughly, including examples of permitted vs. prohibited uses
Students sign and date contract with printed name and PRA section number
Students scan or photograph signed contract and submit to designated Quercus link before first lab period
Students who do not submit signed contract by first lab cannot participate until submission is complete
Signed contracts remain on file as evidence of clear policy communication

Step 6: Ongoing Reminders Throughout Semester

TAs remind students of AI policy when assigning Experiment 2
Quercus assignment page for concept map includes AI policy reminder and link to original contract
Instructor emphasizes during lab lectures that responsible AI use means knowing when not to use it

Future-Focused Skill Development

This activity supports future-ready learning by aligning with principles from the University of Calgary’s STRIVE model. It emphasizes Transparency by explicitly communicating when AI tools are permitted versus prohibited and providing clear rationales for these distinctions, helping students understand that AI appropriateness depends on learning objectives rather than arbitrary rules. It also promotes Responsibility by requiring students to document all AI prompts used, make thoughtful judgments about when AI scaffolds versus undermines learning, and take ownership of their decisions about technology use rather than simply following blanket prohibitions or permissions. Together, these principles help students develop ethical decision-making skills around emerging technologies and cultivate the contextual judgment necessary for responsible AI engagement in future academic and professional scientific practice.

^ back to top