Generative AI (GenAI) is changing teaching, learning, and assessment. Tools such as Microsoft Copilot, Google Gemini, and Anthropic’s Claude open new possibilities for learning, creativity, feedback, and disciplinary practice. They also raise important questions about course design, student use, academic integrity, and how assessment decisions are made. Both opportunities and concerns are worth exploring carefully in relation to your course, discipline, and students. 

This page focuses on GenAI tools in the Learning Technology Ecosystem (LTE) Toolkit: which tools have been approved for academic use, how to request a review of a new tool, and what to consider before using a tool in your teaching or asking students to use it.

For broader guidance on teaching and assessing with GenAI, including the USask AI Principles and Guidelines and the AI Literacy Framework, see Artificial Intelligence at USask. 

Approved GenAI tools in the LTE Toolkit

GenAI tools are reviewed and listed alongside the rest of the LTE Toolkit. They appear in the Academic A–Z Tool List, marked with a GenAI icon , showing which tools are approved for academic use, which are currently under review, and which have been reviewed and found not currently appropriate for use at USask. 

A tool’s status reflects whether it is suitable for academic use at USask, including privacy, security, accessibility, terms of use, and how it fits within the existing LTE Toolkit. Because educator needs, tool features, terms, and data practices change over time, a tool’s review status may need to be revisited.

Review status is crucial when students are asked or required to use a tool, because student use can involve accounts, privacy, accessibility, cost, and equitable access. For your own teaching work, for example, planning a class, drafting materials, or building a question bank, you should use USask-protected AI tools. Whatever tool you use, the main concern is the information and data you enter into it. The AI data handling guidelines provide detailed information about appropriate data use. Many tools, especially those not provided by USask, may retain what is entered or use it to improve future versions, so treat anything submitted to these tools as having left USask protection and control. 

Any generated content requires human review. GenAI can be useful for course material preparation, but output can be inaccurate, out of date, or subtly wrong for your discipline. Reviewing it before it reaches students is still the educator’s responsibility.

Request a review of a new tool

New tools, and new GenAI features inside tools already in use, appear constantly, and the list will not always keep pace. If a tool you want to use for teaching and/or learning is not listed, you can request a review of a new LTE tool. 

The LTE Toolkit relies on educators to identify discipline-specific tools that may be useful in their teaching contexts and to request reviews for tools connected to those use cases. Faculty and other educators in the discipline are best placed to explain the tool’s value and appropriate uses. 

Reviews consider privacy, security, accessibility, and the terms the university would be agreeing to, so they take time. Submit requests well in advance of when you plan to use the tool. Where possible, one term’s notice is ideal. 

Student use of GenAI tools

Educators are best placed to judge what makes sense in their own courses. When students are asked, encouraged, or required to use GenAI, start with approved or USask-protected tools. Where possible, choose tools available at no additional cost through USask accounts that provide additional privacy and data protection. 

Requiring or encouraging students to use GenAI should be part of learning when the use is clearly connected to the learning purpose, expectations are explicit, the tool is approved or USask-protected, and students can access it equitably. Purposeful use of GenAI helps students develop AI literacy, practice responsible and discipline-appropriate use, and prepare for academic, professional, and civic contexts where these tools are increasingly present. 

Before asking, encouraging, or requiring students to use GenAI, consider the following questions to help ensure the activity is purposeful, equitable, and connected to the learning goals. 

  • Is there an approved or USask-protected tool that will meet the learning purpose? If students need to use GenAI for an activity or assessment, choose a tool from the LTE Toolkit whenever possible. If a tool is not listed, request a review before requiring or directing students to use it. 
  • Is use required, optional, or one of several choices? If GenAI use is required, students should have access to an approved or USask-protected tool and know what is expected. If GenAI use is optional or one of several choices, make clear what support or alternatives are available. Expectations for GenAI use, including whether it is required or optional and how it may be used, should be clearly articulated in the course syllabus. 
  • Whose work is being uploaded? Student assignments, your colleague’s materials, library-licensed resources, and copyrighted content may require permission or additional care. Never enter student work into a tool that is unapproved or unprotected. If you plan to enter student work into a USask-protected tool, tell students in advance and seek their permission. The Copyright Office can advise on specific situations. 

Syllabus guidance: setting expectations for GenAI use

Students need expectations for GenAI use to be visible in the course syllabus and reinforced in class, especially before assessments where GenAI use may or may not be appropriate. Expectations are clearest when they are set at the level of the individual assessment rather than the course as a whole, since the answer may be different for a discussion post, lab report, group project, or final paper. 

For each assessment, tell students whether GenAI use is permitted, encouraged, required, or not allowed, and in what ways it may be used. Where GenAI use is permitted, identify any approved or USask-protected tools students should use, explain what kinds of use and support are acceptable, and describe how students should disclose and/or document their use. Examples help students understand the difference between acceptable support and work that would not meet expectations. The guidance on determining levels of acceptable GenAI use offers scales and sample wording you can adapt. 

If students are required to use GenAI, the syllabus should make that expectation clear. If students will need to purchase a license or paid access to an AI tool, that requirement should also be stated clearly. Before requiring students to use a paid tool, consider whether an approved, no-cost, USask-protected alternative is available. 

Clear expectations support student learning and help ensure academic integrity concerns are considered fairly. See the Academic Integrity website for further guidance on GenAI.

Responsible limits on GenAI use

  • Grading and assessment decisions. Keep grading decisions in human hands. GenAI can help draft feedback, refine rubric language, or support assessment planning, but it should not be used to determine a student’s mark or make evaluative judgments about their work. You remain responsible for reviewing anything generated on your behalf. 
  • AI text detectors. We strongly discourage their use. These tools are not reliable enough to support high-stakes decisions. They may incorrectly flag student work as AI-generated, and false positives may disproportionately affect some groups of students, including multilingual writers. Submitting student work to detection tools also raises privacy and copyright concerns. 

For more guidance on responsible teaching and assessment uses of GenAI, see the USask Educator AI Guidelines. 

Resources for teaching with GenAI

The following resources offer practical support for planning courses, designing assessments, setting expectations, and supporting students’ understanding of GenAI. 

Course preparation: GMCTL has short, practical articles: 

For a more complete set of prompts and templates you can adapt, see Prompting AI for Course Design: Tips and Templates. 

Assessment and expectations: The GMCTL guidance on determining levels of acceptable GenAI use offers scales and sample wording for communicating expectations. AI and Authentic Assessments: Preparing Students for an AI-Enabled World offers additional guidance for designing assessments in an AI-enabled context. 

For students: The AI Literacy Tutorial and Understanding Generative AI series from the University Library includes short, self-paced modules that instructors can direct students to. 

Where to find help

Workshops and professional development: GMCTL offers workshops and courses on teaching and assessment with GenAI throughout the year. Visit the workshops and courses page to see upcoming sessions. 

For individual guidance or questions about how GenAI applies in a specific context, contact the appropriate support area below. If you are not sure where a question belongs, ask one of us and we will point you to the right person.