Ethical Guidelines On Artificial Intelligence Use For APC Board Certification Applicants

It is unethical to use generative AI to compose written materials for board certification or any part of the professional credentialing submission. The Board Certification process is intended to represent the chaplain’s personal reflection, theological integration, and clinical experience. The submitted materials are an expression of one’s spiritual and personal formation, clinical application, and professional identity. Using AI to outline, draft, generate, or ghostwrite board certification submission documents constitutes misrepresentation of one’s communication skills, critical thought skills, and proof of ability to engage in graduate level discourse. Any one of these misrepresentations violates the integrity of the certification process and thwarts the opportunity of the applicant to represent and submit their hard-earned professional expertise.

Employing AI-based grammar checkers or writing assistants to improve clarity, syntax, or formatting for written submissions is allowed for Board Certification submissions.

Ethical Violations in Preparation of Board Certification Materials:

Intellectual Honesty (Anti-Plagiarism)

Ethical Concern: Submitting AI-Generated Content as Original WorkExample: Presenting essays or any written submission generated by AI tools or language models (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity AI) as if they were written by the candidate is a form of professional dishonesty and constitutes plagiarism.

Common Code of Ethics 7.8 Exercise conscientiousness in attributing sources in their research and writing thereby avoiding plagiarism.


Integrity

Ethical Concern: Bypassing Critical Thinking and AnalysisExample: Using AI to write arguments, interpret texts, or analyze data without personal engagement or evaluation undermines the certification process and violates professional integrity.

APC Code of Ethics 130.3 Members shall conduct themselves with integrity in all their professional relationships including those whom they serve, their colleagues and the Association.


Truthfulness and Justice

Ethical Concern: Falsifying or Fabricating SourcesExample: Submitting AI-generated work that includes inaccurate, fabricated, or non-existent sources/examples of care encounters is unethical. Fabricating work can lead to unfair advantages and outcomes in the workplace, infringing justice as others have produced work of their own efforts and presented it for assessment measured by BCCi Competencies.

Common Code of Ethics 5.4: Spiritual Care Professionals respect each other and support the integrity and well being of their colleagues.

Examples of Allowed Use

  • Running a grammar check to correct punctuation and subject-verb agreement.
  • Using spell-check; fixing typos; clarifying sentence structure without changing meaning.

Examples of Prohibited Use

  • Asking AI to “rewrite,” “elevate,” “summarize,” or “make it sound more pastoral/professional.”
  • Using AI chatbots to act as a mock interview committee, provide review or evaluation, and adopting their suggested language.
  • Generating, expanding, or polishing theological or reflective content.

Becoming Certified