Universities, law schools, and clinics have rushed to adopt policies about student use of AI tools in a variety of settings. Some are flat (and fairly mindless) prohibitions. Others embrace the pedagogical possibilities of student AI use and attempt to guide it while preserving important underlying learning and ethical principles. Most are somewhere in between.
Mills Legal Clinic Policies and Syllabus Language
SLS Juelsgaard Clinic, Syllabus Language (as of Spring 2024): Use of generative AI tools such as ChatGPT:
“As a default, you should not use ChatGPT or any other generative AI tools in completing any of your clinic assignments. As you’re no doubt aware, several recent cases have involved attorneys using generative AI to prepare briefs or other legal materials, with fairly disastrous results. Various state bars and courts have now instituted rules about the use of generative AI. In JIPIC, our focus on technology and innovation means that we have a strong interest in studying and experimenting with the role that generative AI may play in legal practice. But we also must be careful and ensure that we comply with all quality requirements and ethical responsibilities. So anytime you think that the engaging such technology in a clinic case or project would be interesting, instructive, or productive, talk to your instructors and evaluate what might be appropriate in that case. But you must always receive express approval before actually using any AI tools in our practice.“
SLS Juelsgaard Clinic Syllabus — Spring 2024 JIPIC AI Module on Use of AI in Legal Practice
SLS and Stanford Policies and Syllabus Language
Syllabus language from SLS Prof. Jan Martinez’s 2023 (Re)Designing Dispute Systems course (LAW 7806):
“Generative AI (Artificial Intelligence that can produce contents) is now widely available to produce text, images, and other media. I encourage the use of such AI resources to inform yourself about the field, to understand the contributions that AI can make, and to help your learning. However, keep the following three principles in mind: (1) AI contributions must be attributed and true so ideas and facts must be referenced and validated; (2) The use of AI resources must be open and documented; and (3) An AI generated submission on its own cannot achieve a passing grade. This is necessary to ensure you are competent to surpass generative AI in the future – whether in academia, research, the workplace, or other domains of society. Your task will be to surpass them, so whatever you submit will be compared with solely AI-generated solutions. For your weekly reflections, please use your own ideas to critique the assigned readings or speaker writings. If you choose to supplement with AI, provide transparent citations, according to the Honor Code. We will discuss the use of AI in our first class as a preliminary ground rule.”
“Syllabi Policies for AI Generative Tools” (collection of over 130 AI policies by different types of educational institutions, though only a handful of law schools. Created by educational consultant Lance Eaton
