1. Posting of grades. Faculty will post student grades to Academica within 72 hours of the final exam or equivalent final graded project due date, consistent with University requirements.
    
2. Procedures and restrictions on instructor grade changes. An instructor may not change a final grade except for technical errors (e.g., computational errors or errors in transposing a grade). An instructor who submits a grade change to the Law School Records Office must also submit in writing the reason for such a change, which shall be retained by the Law School Records Office as part of the student's grade records.
    
3. Informal grade review with instructor. A student may ask an instructor for informal review of any grade assigned to that student by that instructor.
    
4. Appeal to Dean or Dean's designee
    
   1. Requirements for appeal. A student may appeal a grade to the Dean or the Dean's designee if and only if the dispute cannot be resolved through informal review by the instructor with the student, and the dispute involves an allegation that the grade was based on one or more of the following: 
      1. improper discriminatory criteria, including without limitation the following: race, color, religion, national origin, sex (including gender identity), sexual orientation, sexual harassment or discrimination, marital status, familial status, age, height, weight, veteran status, or disability; or
      2. other invidious or arbitrary criteria
   2. Procedure for grade appeal. Any grade appeal must be submitted in writing to the Dean's Office within 30 days following the posting of the grade to Academica. The Dean or the Dean's designee will review the complaint and invite the instructor to reply in writing to the objections of the student. If there are reasonable grounds to believe that the student's complaint is valid, the Dean or the Dean's designee will afford the parties the opportunity for a hearing. Within 60 days following receipt of the appeal, the Dean or the Dean's designee will render a final written decision that will, if the grade is changed, be retained by the Law School Records Office as part of the student's grade records.
5. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence. For purposes of this policy, “generative AI” means technology capable of producing original content such as text and images. Not all forms of artificial intelligence are generative. Artificial intelligence applications that enable people to retrieve existing information, for example, are not generative. To illustrate, ChatGPT is generative AI; the product suggestion system on Amazon is not. This policy applies only to generative AI. This policy sets forth default rules governing the use of generative AI. Instructors are free to adopt their own policies on generative AI. Indeed, this default rule is not intended to discourage appropriate instruction and use of generative AI. Course-specific rules should be included in the course syllabus. In the absence of course-specific rules, the following rules govern the use of generative AI in undergraduate LEX courses.
   1. The use of generative AI is prohibited during examinations. This is a categorical rule—students may not interact with generative AI in any way during examinations. It covers not only using generative AI to compose text, but also for (among other uses) brainstorming, issue-spotting, proofreading, or editing. It applies to both proctored and take-home examinations.
   2. The use of generative AI is prohibited in preparing any work that will be submitted for assessment. Like the rule for examinations, this is a categorical rule barring the use of generative AI for any purpose while preparing work—including but not limited to researching or writing of papers, memos, and briefs—that will be submitted for assessment.  
   3. Instructors have discretion about how to handle violations of this section. Depending on the severity of a violation, an instructor might issue a warning, require work to be redone, consider the infraction while grading, or take such other action as the instructor deems appropriate in their sole discretion. Serious or repeated violations constitute academic misconduct and may be handled under the procedures of the Student Code of Conduct. 

Approved by the faculty May, 4, 2021