SNU's AI Guidelines require compliance with core ethical standards (transparency, accuracy, privacy, information security, accountability) throughout the entire AI use process, with domain-specific considerations for education, research, and administration.

AI 활용의 전 과정에서 투명성, 정확성, 프라이버시 · 정보보안, 책임성 등 핵심 윤리 기준을 준수하도록 하고, 교육/학습 · 연구/개발 · 행정 영역별로 요구되는 윤리적 고려 사항 제시

Requires compliance with core ethical standards throughout the AI use process: transparency, accuracy, privacy/information security, accountability, and presents domain-specific ethical considerations for education, research, and administration.


SNU Library guidance states that researchers should use AI to improve research efficiency while maintaining research ethics and practicing responsible AI use.

연구자들은 변화하는 시대에 맞게 학술 연구를 함에 있어 새로운 기술(AI)을 활용하여 연구 효율을 상향시키는 동시에, 연구 윤리를 지키며 책임 있는 AI 사용을 해야 합니다.

Researchers should use new AI technology to improve research efficiency while maintaining research ethics and responsible AI use.

Tracker metadata is open licensed. Official source documents, page text, PDFs, and other source materials retain their original rights and terms.


SNU Library provides an AI ethics checklist requiring researchers to cite AI sources, avoid rights infringement, not input sensitive information, cross-verify AI outputs, and use AI only as a supplementary tool.

생성형 AI의 결과물을 활용할 때 출처를 명확하게 표기했나요? 생성형AI를 활용할 때 타인의 권리가 침해될 수 있는 텍스트, 오디오, 이미지 등을 사용하지 않았나요?

Checklist: Did you clearly cite sources when using generative AI outputs? Did you avoid using text, audio, images that could infringe others' rights?

AI와 연구·출판 윤리


SNU Library advises researchers to check target journal editorial policies from the planning stage, as policies vary on whether LLMs can be listed as authors and whether AI-generated text is permitted.

연구 진행 단계에서부터 논문 투고를 고려하는 저널 및 출판사의 편집 정책을 반드시 확인해야 합니다. 저널·출판사에 따라 ChatGPT와 같은 LLMs를 저자로 인정하지 않으며, AI가 생성한 텍스트를 논문에 사용할 수 없다고 제한하거나 오로지 보조적인 기능으로서의 AI 활용만 인정한다는 입장을 편집 정책에 명시하고 있습니다.

From the research planning stage, researchers must check the editorial policies of target journals. Some journals do not recognize LLMs as authors, restrict AI-generated text in papers, or only permit AI as a supplementary function.


SNU Library warns that not citing generative AI use in papers risks plagiarism charges; researchers must cite AI use according to journal-specific styles (MLA, APA, Chicago).

논문 작성시 생성형 AI의 사용을 인용하지 않는 경우 표절로 간주될 위험이 있습니다. 따라서 연구자들은 각 저널의 스타일에 맞춰 생성형 AI의 사용을 적절하게 인용해야 합니다.

Not citing generative AI use when writing papers risks being considered plagiarism. Researchers must cite AI use appropriately according to each journal's style.


SNU Library notes that many research institutions lack clear AI policies, and researchers operate in uncertainty or within extremely limited scope.

다수의 연구 기관에서는 아직 AI 활용에 관한 명확한 정책을 도입하지 않고 있습니다. 연구자들은 이러한 불확실성 속에서 AI 도구를 사용하거나 극히 제한된 범위 내에서만 사용할 수밖에 없습니다.

Many research institutions have not yet introduced clear policies on AI use. Researchers must use AI tools in this uncertainty or within extremely limited scope.


SNU hosts official Korean and English PDF versions of the SNU AI Guidelines on its downloads page, published January 1, 2026.

서울대학교 AI 가이드라인 제정 전문 국문/영문 PDF download page on snu.ac.kr official downloads section.

Page content (download page for official guidelines PDF)

서울대학교 AI 가이드라인 제정 전문 국문/영문


Stanford's BCA issued guidance on generative AI use, and the Office of Community Standards recommends that instructors give advance notice to students when using AI detection software.

To give sufficient space for instructors to explore uses of generative AI tools in their courses, and to set clear guidelines to students about what uses are and are not consistent with the Stanford Honor Code, the BCA has set forth policy guidance regarding generative AI in the context of coursework. Note: Guidance adopted on February 16, 2023. As part of the BCA's guidance on clear communication of a course's generative AI policy, OCS recommends course instructors provide clear advance notice that they may use detection software to review work submitted for use of generative AI.

Generative AI Policy Guidance - Office of Community Standards (BCA)

Stanford University Office of Community Standards


For Stanford Graduate School of Business (GSB) MBA and MSx courses, instructors may not ban student use of AI tools for take-home coursework, including assignments and exams. Instructors may choose whether to allow AI for in-class work. For PhD and undergraduate courses, GSB follows the university-wide Generative AI Policy Guidance from the Office of Community Standards.

GSB Policy MBA/MSx courses: Instructors may not ban student use of AI tools for take-home coursework, including assignments and exams. Instructors may choose whether to allow student use of AI tools for in-class work, including exams. PhD/Undergraduate courses: Follow the Generative AI Policy Guidance from Stanford's Office of Community Standards.

GSB Guidelines on Classroom AI Use / GSB Policy section

Course Policies on Generative AI Use - Teaching & Learning Hub


Stanford School of Medicine MD and MSPA programs have a formal AI policy: students may use AI for learning, clarification, and grammar/style editing unless contrary to assignment instructions. AI use for closed-book exams or assignments where internet is restricted is prohibited unless explicitly authorized by faculty. Students are responsible for all AI-generated content they submit, must disclose and cite substantial AI contributions, and violations may result in disciplinary action.

Learning and Clarification: Students may utilize AI to enhance their understanding of medical concepts, definitions, and for grammar/style editing, provided it does not conflict with specific assignment instructions or be inconsistent with faculty-authorized tasks. The use of AI tools is discouraged for any activities in which students are evaluated on their own knowledge or skills, unless explicitly granted permission by the faculty. Any substantial contributions from AI tools on assignments, presentations, and scholarly abstracts or proposals must be disclosed and properly cited. Students are responsible for any AI-generated content they submit, even if flawed or biased. All MD and MSPA...

Permitted Uses and Privacy, Assessments, Acknowledgement and Citation, Accuracy & Accountability sections

3.32: Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy - MD Program


Stanford School of Medicine MD and MSPA programs strictly prohibit entering confidential research data, patient data, or protected health information (PHI) into public AI platforms. Use of patient-identifying information or PHI in public AI tools is strictly forbidden. Students must use Stanford-approved AI platforms (e.g., Stanford Healthcare Secure GPT, Stanford AI Playground) when handling sensitive data.

To ensure that patient confidentiality is maintained at all times, no confidential research, patient data, or other protected health information (PHI) is to be entered into public AI platforms (e.g., ChatGPT, Gemini, OpenEvidence, Doximity, etc.). Patient Confidential Data: The use of patient-identifying information or protected health information (PHI) in public AI tools is strictly forbidden.

Permitted Uses and Privacy / Patient Confidential Data sections


Stanford Law School instructors set their own AI policies; in the absence of a course-specific policy, students may use generative AI to support learning and develop or refine their own ideas, but may not use AI to generate content presented as their own work. Using AI during an exam or to draft/revise submitted work is not permitted unless disclosed in advance and explicitly authorized in writing by the instructor. Unauthorized use may result in an F grade and/or referral to Stanford's Office of Community Standards.

In the absence of a course-specific AI policy set by the instructor, students may use generative AI tools to support their learning and to aid in the development or refinement of their own ideas, provided they do not use such tools to generate content that is then presented as their own work. The use of generative AI while taking an exam or to draft or revise any portion of submitted work is not permitted unless (1) fully disclosed in advance of its use by the student to the instructor, and (2) explicitly authorized by the instructor in writing prior to the student's use of the tool. Unauthorized use of AI tools may result in a lower grade, including a grade of F, and/or a referral to Sta...

Use of Generative AI Technology - Stanford Law School


Stanford's Program in Writing and Rhetoric (PWR) prohibits students from using generative AI or LLMs to compose drafts or revisions for any major assignment in PWR courses, including composing or revising portions of essays or scripts, including paraphrases of LLM-generated writing. Students may not rely on generative AI summaries of sources. Violation of PWR's AI policy is treated as an Honor Code violation and results in referral to the Office of Community Standards.

Students may not use generative AI or LLMs to compose the drafts or revisions for any of the major assignments in their PWR classes. This includes using generative AI to compose or revise portions of their essay or scripts (from individual phrases or sentences to longer passages) or including in their essays/scripts paraphrases of LLM-generated writing or paraphrases of source material generated by LLMs. Violation of PWR's AI policy is considered an Honor Code violation and will result in the involvement of Stanford's Office of Community Standards (OCS).

PWR Policy on GenAI Use in PWR classes section

Stanford Program in Writing and Rhetoric


Stanford's Bechtel Center for Advising (BCA) provides guidance on generative AI in the context of the Honor Code, noting that acceptable AI use depends on individual instructor and course policies.

To give sufficient space for instructors to explore uses of generative AI tools in their courses, and to set clear guidelines to students about what uses are and are not consistent with the Stanford Honor Code, the BCA has set forth policy guidance regarding generative AI in the context of coursework. Note: Guidance adopted on February 16, 2023.

Generative AI Policy Guidance section (adopted Feb 16, 2023)


Stanford University IT (UIT) advises users to avoid inputting Moderate or High Risk Data into third-party AI platforms or tools not covered by a Stanford Business Associates Agreement, whether using a personal or Stanford account. Users should opt out of sharing chat data with third-party AI providers when possible.

Avoid inputting any sensitive data, such as Moderate or High Risk Data, whether using a personal or Stanford account with a third-party AI platform or tool that is not covered by a Stanford Business Associates Agreement. It's recommended to opt out of sharing data for AI iterative learning wherever possible. If generative AI is to be used to interact with users, obtain their informed consent. If your final product is significantly influenced by an AI platform, consider informing people how you used AI and cite appropriately.

Safety Measures section and Recommended Best Practices

Responsible AI at Stanford - University IT


Stanford University Communications (UComm) has issued AI guidelines for marketing and communications staff requiring: human oversight of all AI-generated content (non-delegable personal responsibility), adherence to university policies, prohibition on inputting confidential or legally privileged information into generative AI tools, prohibition on using AI to promote for-profit organizations or engage in political advocacy, and prohibition on using high-risk data in prompts. Stanford AI Playground is recommended as the primary platform. These guidelines apply to all regular staff, interns, casual employees, and consultants in marketing and communications functions.

These guidelines apply to all regular staff, interns, casual employees, and consultants. You are personally responsible for oversight of any content you produce using AI to ensure that content is accurate, in alignment with institutional values, and in compliance with the policies set forth in this document. You are personally responsible for conforming to this requirement and this responsibility may not be delegated to another employee. You may not provide any confidential or legally privileged information of Stanford or a third party to generative AI tools. Do not use high-risk data in your prompts or include such data as attachments to your prompts.

Introduction, Scope, Responsible and Ethical Usage, Compliance sections

AI Guidelines for Marketing and Communications


The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK)

At CUHK, improper or unauthorized use of AI tools in learning activities and assessments constitutes academic dishonesty and is subject to penalties including failure grade, suspension, or termination of studies.

Improper/unauthorized use of AI tools is regarded as academic dishonesty and is subject to the categories of offence (and corresponding penalties) as specified in the Procedures, e.g. 'plagiarism', 'employing or using services provided by a third party', and 'all other acts of academic dishonesty'

Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools in Teaching, Learning and Assessments - A Guide for Students


CUHK requires students to declare in each assignment that they have read and understood the University's policy on AI use, complied with course teacher instructions on AI tools, and consent to AI content detection software review.

I/we declare that I/we have read and understood the University's policy on the use of AI for academic work. I/we confirm that I/we have complied with the instructions given by my/our course teacher(s) regarding the use of AI tools for this assignment and consent to the use of AI content detection software to review my/our submission.

Academic Honesty Declaration, Section 10

Declaration to be included in assignments - CUHK Academic Honesty Policy


CUHK defines four approaches to AI use in courses: (1) prohibit all use, (2) use only with prior permission, (3) use only with explicit acknowledgement, and (4) free use without acknowledgement requirement.

Approach 1 – Prohibit all use of AI tools... Approach 2 – Use only with prior permission... Approach 3 – Use only with explicit acknowledgement... [Approach 4 –] Students are allowed to use AI tools in learning activities and/or assessments without being required to explicitly cite or otherwise acknowledge the use of these tools

Student Guide, Paragraphs 12 (Approaches 1-4)


CUHK penalties for academic dishonesty involving AI tools may include reviewable/permanent demerits, failure grade, suspension, lowering degree classification, and termination of studies.

Penalties for offences of academic dishonesty may include reviewable/permanent demerit(s), failure grade for the course concerned, suspension from the University, lowering the degree classification, and termination of studies at the University.


CUHK provides Microsoft Copilot Chat (Basic) free to all students and staff under the Microsoft 365 license, with enterprise data protection when signed in with CUHK account.

Microsoft Copilot Chat (Basic) is an AI-powered productivity tool. It provides you with a simple chat experience in web browsers such as Microsoft Edge. After login with your CUHK login, your chat data will be protected and would not be stored by Microsoft to protect privacy.

ITSC Copilot Chat Basic page, main description

Microsoft Copilot Chat (Basic) - CUHK ITSC


CUHK's student AI guide establishes ethical principles of accountability, transparency, and acknowledgement for AI tool use. Users are accountable for AI-generated outputs and must fact-check all outputs.

Accountability: Users of AI tools are accountable for the AI-generated results included in their work. Hence, users should carefully evaluate the implications of using AI tools for teaching, learning and assessments before adopting such tools. Users should fact-check all outputs of AI tools by cross-checking the claims against reliable sources


CUHK provides M365 Copilot (Premium) as a charged service for staff, project accounts, and departmental accounts, integrating with Microsoft 365 apps for AI-powered productivity.

M365 Copilot (Premium) is an AI-powered productivity tool that seamlessly integrates with various Microsoft 365 apps (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, Teams, and more)... Available to: All Staff, Project Accounts and Departmental Accounts. Service Charge and Application: Charged; application required.


CUHK emphasizes responsible and ethical use of generative AI in education, prohibiting unauthorized AI use in assignments while allowing its use under specific conditions with proper citation and permissions.

The Chinese University of Hong Kong emphasizes the responsible and ethical use of generative AI tools in education, promoting familiarity and critical engagement among teachers and students. The university upholds academic integrity by prohibiting unauthorized AI use in assignments and assessments, while allowing its use under specific conditions with proper citation and permissions.

CLEAR Generative AI page, main description

Generative AI in Education - Centre for Learning Enhancement And Research (CLEAR), CUHK


CUHK advises using Microsoft Copilot with CUHK institutional sign-in for data protection, as user and business data is protected and not used to train underlying models.

Copilot (Microsoft Bing Chat) – Copilot with data protection: 'User and business data in Copilot is protected and will not leak outside the organization. Chat data is not saved, and Microsoft has no eyes-on access to it. Chat data is also not used to train our underlying models.' To ensure the correct environment and protection of prompts, CUHK users are advised to sign in to Copilot using their institutional email.

Using AI in Education and Research - CUHK Library LibGuides


CUHK's AI guide applies to teaching, learning, and assessments. For research contexts (capstone courses, theses), students must also refer to separate Guidelines on the Responsible Use of AI for Research.

For teaching, learning and assessments involving research (e.g. capstone courses, final year projects, research proposals and theses), reference should also be made to the Guidelines on the Responsible Use of AI for Research, as appropriate.


CUHK ITSC provides AI Hub @ CUHK as a one-stop hub for AI resources at the University, offering an overview of AI tools and services for teaching, learning, research, and work.

AI Hub @ CUHK aims to serve as the one-stop hub for AI resources at the University. University provides various AI tools and services to support teaching, learning, research, and work. The AI Hub @ CUHK offers an overview of these resources, aiding users in selecting appropriate technology for their needs.


CUHK Library advises users to be aware of privacy policies of AI platforms, to opt out of data being used for model training where possible, and to avoid inputting confidential information into external AI tools.

Be aware of the terms of use and privacy policies of AI platforms. Choose to opt-out to prompt information from being used for program development, if possible... it is advisable to refrain from inputting confidential information into any external tools, regardless of whether they are subscribed to or recommended by the university.

Library AI Guide, Privacy section and Security section


The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology

HKUST guidelines state that users shall not use generative AI tools for unlawful, harmful, or malicious activities, including fraud, harassment, defamation, or infringement of rights.

Users shall not use generative AI tools for any unlawful, harmful, or malicious activities, including but not limited to fraud, harassment, defamation, or infringement of rights.

Generative AI Usage Guidelines | Information Technology Services Office


HKUST allows faculty members the flexibility to set their own course-level policies for GenAI integration in teaching and learning.

HKUST allows faculty members the flexibility to set their own course-level policies. Faculty members are required to communicate the chosen policy option to students in writing for courses offered starting Fall 2023-24.

Policy for GenAI Integration in Teaching and Learning section

Guidelines and Policies | HKUST CEI | Center for Education Innovation


HKUST provides approved generative AI tools including OpenWebUI, HKUST GenAI Platform, Google Gemini Enterprise, Microsoft Copilot Chat, and Microsoft 365 Copilot.

Generative AI Tools Available to HKUST Members: HKUST GenAI Platform, OpenWebUI, Google Gemini Enterprise, Microsoft Copilot Chat, Microsoft 365 Copilot, AI Chatbot for HKUST Drupal Platform, Azure OpenAI API Access.

Generative AI Tools Available to HKUST Members section

Generative AI Tools | Information Technology Services Office


HKUST advises users not to input confidential, sensitive, or personal data into generative AI tools unless data is desensitized.

Users are advised not to use confidential HKUST documents in those tools unless they are desensitized. Avoid inputting confidential, sensitive, or personal data into generative AI tools.


HKUST assessment policies require course syllabi to clearly present policies on the use of Generative AI tools and academic integrity.

the course syllabus should be devised to present course ILOs, assessment components, grading rubrics, and relevant policies like the use of Generative AI tools and the rules of academic integrity clearly and make it accessible to students at the start of the course via Canvas or other appropriate platform.

Assessment of students should be transparent, point 5

Assessment Policies and Procedures | HKUST - Academic Registry


At the University of Edinburgh, presenting AI outputs as your own original work, submitting AI-generated text without acknowledgment, and using AI agents within university learning platforms constitute academic misconduct.

The following uses of generative and agentic AI are not acceptable and constitute misconduct: 1. Presenting AI outputs as your own, original work. 2. Using an AI translator to convert assessed work to English before submission. 3. Submitting an assessment which includes elements of AI-generated text without acknowledgment. 4. Submitting AI-generated images, audio or video without acknowledgment. 5. Submitting AI-generated mathematical formulae or reasoning, or computer code, without acknowledgment. 6. Citing AI-found sources without reading and verifying them. 7. Using an AI agent or AI browser to complete work within your virtual learning environment.

Student guidance > Unacceptable uses of generative AI for assessment

Using generative AI in your studies: guidelines for students


The University of Edinburgh does not ban the use of generative AI by students, though its use is restricted for much assessed work.

The University does not ban the use of AI, though its use will be restricted for much of your assessed work.

Student guidance > Introduction bullet points


ELM (Edinburgh access to Language Models) is the University of Edinburgh's AI innovation platform and a central gateway providing safer access to generative AI through large language models.

ELM is the University of Edinburgh's AI innovation platform, a central gateway providing safer access to Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) via access to Large Language Models (LLMs).

ELM - Edinburgh access to Language Models


At the University of Edinburgh, staff presenting AI-generated content as their own original work, uploading personal data or confidential information to external AI tools, and relying on AI detection tools are listed as unacceptable uses.

Unacceptable uses (for staff): Presenting AI generated content as your own original work. Uploading personal data or confidential information to external AI tools. Using ELM with identifiable patient/clinical data. Publishing AI assisted content without appropriate attribution. Relying on AI for decisions where legal/ethical duties require human judgement. Ignoring funder, publisher or regulator rules on AI use. Do not rely on AI detection tools to confirm authorship. They misclassify human and AI content.

Staff guidance > Unacceptable uses (for staff)

Using Generative AI in Your Work: Guidance for Staff


The University of Edinburgh states that ELM chat histories are private to the individual user and are not accessible to lecturers for checking student work.

Please note, your lecturers do not have access to your chat history in ELM for the purposes of 'checking' your work - like your email account, it is private to you.


The University of Edinburgh advises staff not to rely on AI detection tools to confirm authorship, as they misclassify human and AI content.

Do not rely on AI detection tools to confirm authorship. They misclassify human and AI content.


The University of Edinburgh does not ban the use of generative AI in postgraduate research, though its use is restricted for work assessed by the University and students must discuss AI use with supervisors.

The University does not ban the use of generative AI in your research, though its use is restricted for work assessed by the University.

PGR guidance > Introduction bullet points

Generative AI Guidelines for Postgraduate Research Students


The University of Edinburgh says users can access the Copilot chat service within Edge by signing in with University credentials, where a green shield indicates additional protections.

Currently, you can access the CoPilot chat service within Edge by signing in with your University credentials. A green shield will appear, giving you additional protections.

AI in Microsoft 365 > Can I have access to Copilot?


HKU's Guidelines on the Responsible Use of Generative AI in Research were formally approved by the Senate on September 23, 2025 and are now in effect.

I am pleased to announce that the Guidelines on the Responsible Use of Generative AI in Research at The University of Hong Kong have been formally approved by the Senate and are now in effect.

Guidelines on the Responsible Use of Generative AI in Research at HKU

The University of Hong Kong - Research Services


HKU states that researchers should clearly disclose generative AI tool usage in research outputs, publications, and presentations, including the type of GenAI used, data sources, and potential limitations.

Transparency and Disclosure: Clearly disclose GenAI tool usage in research outputs, publications, or presentations, for example the type of GenAI used, data sources, and potential limitations. Maintain detailed documentation of GenAI prompts, outputs, and decision-making processes involving GenAI.

General Principles of Responsible Use - Transparency and Disclosure

Responsible Use of Generative AI in Research at HKU


HKU states that input data used with generative AI should comply with data protection laws and university policies, and that users should avoid sharing sensitive, confidential, or proprietary information with GenAI platforms.

Data Privacy and Confidentiality: Ensure input data used with GenAI complies with data protection laws and University policies. Avoid sharing sensitive, confidential, or proprietary information with GenAI platforms.

General Principles of Responsible Use - Data Privacy and Confidentiality


HKU holds researchers responsible for the outputs generated by generative AI and their implications; GenAI should be used as a support tool, not a substitute for critical analysis and human expertise.

Accountability: Researchers are responsible for the outputs generated by GenAI and their implications. ... Limit Over-Reliance: Use GenAI as a support tool, not a substitute for critical analysis and human expertise.

General Principles - Accountability; Best Practices - Limit Over-Reliance


HKU states that researchers should ensure generative AI use does not infringe existing intellectual property rights or compromise research output ownership.

Respect Intellectual Property and Ownership: Ensure that the use of GenAI does not infringe on existing rights or compromise research outputs ownership.

General Principles of Responsible Use - Respect Intellectual Property and Ownership


HKU's GenAI research guidelines are positioned as an institutional policy under the Research Integrity framework, approved by Senate in September 2025.

HKU is committed to fostering responsible GenAI practices and promoting best practices in the adoption of GenAI among researchers, students, supervisors and other staff in the research community. The Guidelines on the Responsible Use of Generative AI in Research at The University of Hong Kong was approved by the Senate on September 23, 2025.

Responsible Use of Generative AI in Research at HKU section


The University of Manchester does not ban generative AI. The university's position is that when used appropriately, AI tools have the potential to enhance teaching and learning, and can support inclusivity and accessibility.

The University position is that, when used appropriately, AI tools have the potential to enhance teaching and learning and can support inclusivity and accessibility. Output from AI systems must be treated in the same manner by staff and students as work created by another person or persons, used critically and with permitted license, and cited and acknowledged appropriately.

Teaching and Learning > University position

Guidelines | AI Hub - StaffNet - The University of Manchester


Manchester has adopted five core principles for AI use: transparency, accountability, competence, responsible use, and respect. All staff and students using or developing AI are personally responsible for adhering to these.

The University has adopted the following principles, building on existing frameworks for academic integrity and emerging guidance on AI. All staff and students using or developing AI are personally responsible for adhering to these.


The University of Manchester is the world's first university to deploy equitable Microsoft 365 Copilot access and training across its entire community, with 65,000 colleagues and students receiving the full M365 Copilot suite.

The University has announced a strategic collaboration with Microsoft, making Manchester the world's first university to deploy equitable Microsoft 365 Copilot access and training across its entire community. This means 65,000 colleagues and students will benefit from the full Microsoft 365 Copilot suite.

Approved Tools | AI Hub - StaffNet - The University of Manchester


Copilot Chat is available to everyone with a University of Manchester account. The university has a contractual agreement with Microsoft ensuring prompts and uploaded files are private, protected by the same security and encryption as emails and OneDrive. The AI system does not learn from user prompts or data.

Copilot Chat is an AI-powered assistant available to everyone with a University account... Your prompts and uploaded files are private – no one else can see them and they are protected by the same security and encryption techniques as your emails and the contents of your OneDrive or SharePoint Sites. Copilot Chat's AI system does not learn from your prompts or data.

Copilot Chat > Privacy and Data Security


Submitting work created by generative AI as one's own, or misrepresenting understanding of the subject, is plagiarism at Manchester and will be dealt with in accordance with the University's Academic Malpractice Procedure.

Submitting work created by Generative AI as their own, or to misrepresent their understanding of the subject, is plagiarism and will be dealt with in accordance with the University's Academic Malpractice Procedure.


Tools to detect AI-generated content are unreliable and biased and cannot be relied on to identify academic malpractice in summative assessment at Manchester. Output from such tools cannot currently be used as evidence of malpractice.

Tools to detect AI-generated content are unreliable and biased and cannot be relied on to identify academic malpractice in summative assessment. Output from such tools cannot currently be used as evidence of malpractice.

Teaching and Learning > Detecting malpractice


Students at Manchester must cite or acknowledge the outputs of generative AI tools when they use them in their work, including quoting, summarising, paraphrasing, editing, translating, data processing, re-writing, and idea generation.

You must cite or acknowledge the outputs of generative A.I. tools when you use them in your work. Quotating, summarising and paraphrasing, editing, translating, data processing, re-writing your work and the generation of ideas.

Can I use an AI tool in my assignments? > You must cite or acknowledge

Referencing guide at the University of Manchester: AI and referencing


University-approved enterprise AI tools (Microsoft Copilot Chat for all, M365 Copilot via licences) must be used whenever there is a risk of inappropriate disclosure. Free-to-use public AI services should only be used with extreme caution due to data disclosure risks.

Many generative AI tools are available as either free-to-use public services or paid-for enterprise services. Free-to-use public services often store user input, potentially disclosing the content to third parties. They should only be used with extreme caution... University-approved enterprise AI tools must be used whenever there is a risk of inappropriate disclosure.

Use of AI and AI-Enabled Tools > University-approved AI services


With approval at School level, Manchester's default AI position may be broadened or narrowed for specific course units or assignments. Students must be given detailed information explaining the rationale and what is and is not allowed.

With approval at School level, this position may be broadened or narrowed for specific Course Units or assignments to encourage, require, or disallow specific uses of AI. In such cases students must be given detailed information that explains the rationale for the variation from the default position, as well as what is and is not allowed.

Teaching and Learning > Course unit variation


Using an AI tool to correct grammar or spelling is acceptable at Manchester, but students should ensure that use of the tool does not result in substantive changes to the content or meaning of their work.

Using an AI tool to correct grammar or spelling is acceptable, but where a student uses an AI tool for proofreading work submitted for assessment, they should ensure that use of the tool does not result in substantive changes to the content or meaning of their work.


Manchester recognises the potential of AI to power research and innovation. Any use of AI to generate data should be completely transparent. Using AI to fabricate or manipulate data without clear declaration constitutes research misconduct.

The University recognises the potential of AI to power research and innovation... Any use of AI to generate data should be completely transparent... Using AI to fabricate or manipulate data such as experimental measurements, interview texts or research images, without clear declaration, constitutes research misconduct.


The University recommends Microsoft Copilot for AI-related work. It is GDPR-compliant and protects University and personal data. Staff should always carefully consider whether adding personal information into an AI tool is necessary.

Microsoft Copilot: The University recommends using Microsoft Copilot for AI-related work. It is GDPR-compliant and protects University and personal data. Even though Copilot is GDPR compliant, you should ALWAYS carefully consider whether adding personal information into an AI tool is necessary.

Artificial Intelligence and Teaching and Learning - Teaching College


At the University of Melbourne, using GenAI tools to produce work submitted for assessment without acknowledgement constitutes academic misconduct under cl. 4.13 of the Student Academic Integrity Policy (MPF1310).

If an assessment task does not permit the use of such tools, or if they use such tools in the preparation of an assessment submission without acknowledgement, this constitutes academic misconduct under cl. 4.13 of the Student Academic Integrity Policy (MPF1310).

Section: University policies in relation to Generative AI, subsection: Are students allowed to use GenAI?

Generative AI in T&L at the University of Melbourne


A high AI score in Turnitin's writing detection report at the University of Melbourne is not proof that academic misconduct has taken place and does not on its own constitute grounds for making an allegation of academic misconduct.

A high AI score in Turnitin's writing detection report is not proof that academic misconduct has taken place (any more than would be the case when using the more familiar similarity report tool to flag potential plagiarism). It does not, on its own, constitute grounds for making an allegation of academic misconduct.

Section: AI and assessment, subsection: What do I do if I think a student has inappropriately used GenAI on an assessment?


Students must check with their Subject Coordinator before using GenAI for assessment-related work at the University of Melbourne.

Before you use GenAI for assessment-related work you must check to ensure that your Subject Coordinator has authorised its use.

Section: Is it okay to use GenAI at Melbourne?


University of Melbourne assessment materials and teaching materials constitute University IP and should never be tested on third-party external GenAI platforms such as ChatGPT; any such testing must be done only within the University's secure SparkAI platform.

Since assessments and other teaching materials constitute University IP, they should never be tested on third-party external platforms such as ChatGPT, since these platforms use all prompts and inputs to further train their models. Any such testing/auditing must be done only within the University's secure GenAI platform (SparkAI) or other University of Melbourne-sanctioned platforms.

Section: AI and assessment, subsection: Can I check whether my assessment is potentially vulnerable to GenAI?


University of Melbourne students must appropriately cite any use of GenAI tools in the preparation of assessment submissions.

Any use of GenAI in the preparation of an assessment submission must be appropriately cited.


At the University of Melbourne, generative AI tools can only be used in research outputs where the material generated or substantially altered by these tools is acknowledged according to the University's policy and the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research.

Generative AI tools can only be used if material that is generated or substantially altered by these tools is acknowledged according to the University's policy and the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research.

Section: Challenges to research integrity

UoM Submission: Inquiry into Generative AI in Education


The University of Melbourne advises researchers that they should not share confidential information or information about an innovation in a generative AI prompt, as that may mean the IP is no longer owned by the researcher or by the University.

The University has advised researchers that they should not share confidential information or information about an innovation in a generative AI prompt, as that may mean that the IP is no longer owned by the researcher or by the University.


University of Melbourne students must not upload personal information (full name, date of birth, address, or other confidential/sensitive/private information) to GenAI tools.

Protect your personal information and that of others. Do not upload your full name, date of birth, address or other confidential, sensitive or private information.

Section: Limitations and risks, subsection: Privacy


University of Melbourne students must not upload copyrighted material (such as lecture slides or subject material) to AI tools without permission, as this may violate the intellectual property rights of creators.

Don't make copyright material available on the web or to an AI tool without permission.

Section: Limitations and risks, subsection: Intellectual property


Each University of Melbourne subject coordinator is responsible for setting out the bounds of appropriate GenAI use within their subject, and is strongly encouraged to consider possible use case scenarios, set clear boundaries, and have conversations with students.

It is the responsibility of each subject coordinator to set out the bounds of appropriate GenAI use within their subject. Coordinators are strongly encouraged to consider possible use case scenarios for their assessments, set clear boundaries, and have conversations with their students to enable clarity about what tools are appropriate and for what tasks.


The University of Melbourne states that University IP cannot be uploaded to external sites and recommends using the University's SparkAI platform when staff want AI to review University materials.

University IP cannot be uploaded to external sites, so if you want AI to review some of your materials, we recommend using the SparkAI platform.

Section: University policies in relation to Generative AI, subsection: Can staff use GenAI tools to help create teaching materials?


At the University of Melbourne, use of GenAI tools for marking or grading should never be a substitute for staff exercising their own evaluative judgement.

Use of GenAI tools should never be a substitute for staff exercising their own evaluative judgement.

Section: University policies in relation to Generative AI, subsection: Can staff use GenAI for marking/grading of student work?


The University of Melbourne advises staff to model the transparency requested from students by acknowledging the use of any GenAI tools in materials provided to students.

We should also model the transparency we are requesting from students and acknowledge the use of any GenAI tools in materials we provide to them.


University of Melbourne staff should consider and provide advice on the limits of acceptable use of AI-powered translation and editing tools (e.g. Grammarly, Google Translate) in their subjects, as student use can extend to the point where students are no longer expressing their own ideas.

Student use of these tools may pose risks to academic integrity, and staff should consider and provide advice on the limits of acceptable use in their subject. Use of these tools can easily extend to the point where students are no longer expressing their own ideas or understanding of the subject matter.

Section: AI and assessment, subsection: Is it okay if students use GenAI for language translation or editing their work?


The University of Melbourne recommends that universities should have autonomy over their own generative AI policies and that the Australian Government develop optional guidance for the sector on the use of generative AI in teaching, learning, assessment, and research.

The Australian Government develop optional guidance for the sector on the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in teaching, learning, assessment, and research. However, Universities should continue to have autonomy over their own generative AI policies to ensure they are appropriate for their communities.

Section: Recommendations, Recommendation 1


The University of Melbourne has adopted AI Principles designed to guide actions around the adoption and use of AI tools and systems across the institution.

This guidance is also influenced by the University of Melbourne AI Principles, which have been designed to guide actions around the adoption and use of AI tools and systems.

What Is This Guide? - Melbourne School of Design


University of Melbourne students must produce the text, code, designs, or images they are being assessed on themselves, not via GenAI, in order to develop the skills and capabilities their degree claims they have.

To develop these skills and capabilities, you must produce the text, code, designs or images you're being assessed on. For example, if a subject learning outcome includes 'discuss and critique', you must generate that discussion and critique – not GenAI – in order to develop those skills.

Section: How to use GenAI safely, subsection: Remember your value


The University of Melbourne has published a Statement on Graduate Research and digital assistance tools governing the use of AI tools by Graduate Researchers.

Statement on Graduate Research and digital assistance tools — This page features the University's official statement about the use of digital assistance tools by Graduate Researchers.

Official statements from The University of Melbourne


The University of New South Wales (UNSW Sydney)

UNSW uses a Levels of AI Assistance framework with six categories for assessments: No Assistance, Simple Editing Assistance, Planning or Design Assistance, Assistance with Attribution, Generative AI Software-based Assessments, and Not Applicable.

The Levels of AI Assistance framework is designed to help convenors communicate to students how much, or how little AI can be used in the process of planning, creating and producing an assignment.

Using AI in university | Current Students – UNSW Sydney


UNSW defines six high-level categories for permitted AI use in assessments: No Assistance, Simple Editing Assistance, Planning/Design Assistance, Assistance with Attribution, Generative AI Software-based Assessments, and Not Applicable.

Based on extensive feedback across UNSW, six high-level categories have been defined for assessments that include some degree of AI use, as well as an additional category for assessments where AI is unlikely to be used.

Section 'Categories of permitted AI use in assessment'

Guidance on AI in assessment | UNSW Staff Teaching Gateway


Under UNSW's 'No Assistance' level, students are not permitted to use any generative AI tools, software, or service to search for or generate information or answers.

This assessment is designed for you to complete without the use of any generative AI.  You are not permitted to use any generative AI tools, software or service to search for or generate information or answers.


At UNSW, the unauthorised or unacknowledged use of AI in assessments is classified as cheating and considered student misconduct under the Code of Conduct and Values.

The unauthorised or unacknowledged use of AI in assessments is a form of cheating and is considered to be student misconduct at UNSW under the current Code of Conduct and Values.

FAQ section 'What are the implications of unauthorised use of AI?'


UNSW has published six AI principles: AI use must benefit UNSW and society; be equitable and respectful of human rights; be trustworthy, safe, and reliable; be transparent; be identifiable, explainable, and contestable; and be secure and resilient.

The use of AI systems at UNSW benefits UNSW, individuals, society, and the environment. The use of AI systems at UNSW is equitable, and respectful of human rights, diversity, inclusivity, and accessibility. AI systems and their lifecycle at UNSW are trustworthy and are used responsibly, safely, and reliably in accordance with their intended purpose. The use of AI systems is transparent, and people understand when the AI system is engaging with or impacting them, the environment, and/or society. AI systems and their lifecycle used at UNSW are identifiable, explainable, interpretable, accountable, and contestable. AI systems and their lifecycle used at UNSW are secure and resilient.

Section 'Responsible use of Generative AI tools' - AI principles


UNSW's first key principle for AI in assessment requires staff to be honest and transparent about the use of any AI tool where it would reasonably be expected that use of the tool would be disclosed.

Be honest and transparent about the use of any AI tool where it would reasonably be expected that use of the tool would be disclosed.

Section 'Key principles of AI usage in assessment'


UNSW's second key principle for AI in assessment requires that any AI-based output must be reviewed with all due diligence before being released or relied upon, particularly to avoid bias and factual errors.

Ensure that any AI-based output is reviewed with all due diligence before being released or relied upon. This is particularly important to ensure that you avoid bias and factual errors in the output.


UNSW states that as a rule, markers must not use AI platforms for marking or grading student work.

As a rule, markers must not use AI platforms for marking or grading.

Section 'What needs to be considered before integrating AI in my assessment?' > Be clear with teaching staff


UNSW only authorises the use of Turnitin's AI Writing Detection Tool for detecting improper AI use in student work; UNSW IT has not approved other detection tools due to privacy and accuracy concerns.

UNSW only authorises the use of Turnitin's AI Writing Detection Tool for detecting improper AI use. Students' work should not be uploaded to any other platform because: Only Turnitin has been approved by UNSW Cyber Security as protecting student privacy. The accuracy of other detection tools is extremely low.

Section 'Academic integrity and AI detection' > Digital Detection Tools


Where unauthorised AI use in an assessment is admitted or determined at UNSW, a finding of serious student misconduct is made as a breach of Principle 3 of the Student Code of Conduct, with penalties consistent with Serious Student Misconduct and Serious Plagiarism (typically 00FL for the course, suspension, or exclusion).

Where the unauthorised use of AI in an assessment is admitted or determined, a finding of serious student misconduct is made – as a breach of Principle 3 of the Student Code of Conduct which states that students must act with integrity, honesty and trust. The penalties for a finding of this sort would be consistent with the penalties for Serious Student Misconduct and Serious Plagiarism – they would normally sit at 00FL for the course, suspension or exclusion depending on the matter.

Section 'How can a student be penalised for improper use of GenAI?'


UNSW requires that students must follow assessment instructions regarding AI use, that what students present must be their own work, and that students must acknowledge all sources including AI as an external source using proper referencing.

Students must follow the assessment instructions... What students present must be their own work... Students must acknowledge sources. Students should attribute all sources using proper referencing, unless the assessment nature or instructions exempt them from doing so. External sources that must be referenced include both the work of others and sources from digital or physical objects, with AI classified as an external source.

Section 'Guidance to students' > fundamental principles of assessment

Helping you guide your students | UNSW Staff Teaching Gateway


UNSW College students may only use AI for an assessment if the instructions in the Course Outline permit its use.

You may use AI for an assessment if the instructions in your Course Outline permit its use.

Section 'Appropriate Use of Generative AI' > Guideline 1

Student AI Guidelines | UNSW College Current Students Website


UNSW College requires that if AI is permitted for an assessment, students must acknowledge and reference the AI tool using the referencing style for their course and program (e.g., APA Style Referencing 7th edition).

If you are permitted to use AI for part or all of your assessment, you must: Acknowledge and reference the AI tool using the referencing style for your course and program. For example, APA Style Referencing 7th edition.

Section 'Appropriate Use of Generative AI' > Guideline 4 (Referencing and Citations)


UNSW penalties for unauthorised AI use in assessments may include a fail grade, a mark of zero for the course, suspension, or permanent exclusion.

If you have been found to use AI in a manner that does not meet the course instructions, penalties may occur which would include a fail, a mark of zero for the course, suspension or permanent exclusion.


UNSW advises students given permission to use AI in assessments to always clearly acknowledge that use when planning, designing, or writing their assessment.

If you are given permission and wish to use AI in the process of planning, designing, or writing your assessment, you should always clearly acknowledge this.

Main content section 'When using AI in your assessment'


UNSW requires that when ChatGPT or other forms of GenAI are accepted as part of an assessment, academics must ensure the tools are easily accessible for all students with no physical, geographical, or financial restrictions.

When ChatGPT or other forms of GenAI are accepted as part of an assessment, academics must ensure that they are easily accessible for everyone. There must be no physical, geographical or financial restrictions on students' use of the tool.

Section 'What needs to be considered before integrating AI in my assessment?' > Equitable access


UNSW's investigation process for suspected improper AI use involves five steps: initial sense-check, checking signs of AI writing, discussing with the student, contacting the School Student Integrity Adviser (SSIA), and referral to the Conduct & Integrity Office.

Step 1: Initial checks... Step 2: Check the signs... Step 3: Discuss with the student... Step 4: Contact your SSIA for further assistance... Step 5: Contact the Conduct & Integrity Office

Section 'How can I investigate students' improper use of AI?'


UNSW states that students are entitled to use generative AI to the extent specified by course instructions or university rules, and that assessment instructions should set out acceptable use of AI tools.

Students are entitled to use generative AI to the extent specified by the course instructions or university rules. All assessment instructions should set out the acceptable use of AI tools.

Section 'Guidance to students' > fundamental principles


UNSW College recommends Microsoft Copilot as the only generative AI platform for staff and students, as it provides commercial data protection and is the only platform recommended where generative AI use is allowed in coursework and assessment.

UNSW College recommend that students use the College Microsoft Copilot AI Tool... Where the use of generative AI is allowed as part of coursework and/or assessment, this is the only generative AI platform recommended for UNSW College staff and students.

Section 'Appropriate Use of Generative AI' > Guideline 2 (Study)


UNSW provides academics with access to Turnitin's AI detection tool for assessments submitted through Moodle Turnitin Assignment or Inspera, but notes this is not always conclusive evidence of improper AI use.

All academics marking assessments submitted through either Moodle Turnitin Assignment or Inspera now have access to Turnitin's new AI detection tool. This provides academics with an estimated percentage of text that has similarities to AI-generated or AI-paraphrased text. This is not always conclusive evidence that a student has inappropriately used generative AI, however, this will be a flag for a marker to further review a student's submission.

FAQ section 'How does Turnitin's AI detection tool work?'


UNSW classifies Grammarly, Quillbot, and translation tools such as Google Translate, DeepL, and Baidu Translate as forms of generative AI.

It's important that students are aware of what tools use generative AI and may be inappropriate in an assessment. For example, Grammarly, Quillbot and translation tools such as Google Translate, DeepL and Baidu Translate are forms of generative AI.


UNSW advises students not to include any personal or sensitive information in AI prompts, including addresses, names, emails, zID, or intellectual property, and recommends using Microsoft Copilot with a UNSW account for data privacy.

Protect personal information. Do not include any personal or sensitive information in prompts, your own or other people's (i.e. addresses, name, emails, zID or intellectual property). For data privacy and protection, use Microsoft Copilot using your UNSW account


UNSW has developed an AI capability framework for teaching staff covering common knowledge (what is AI, prompts, evaluating outputs), AI governance, ethical and responsible use, assessment and learning, and technology (Microsoft Copilot, Adobe Firefly, Scite.ai).

To equip our staff to meet the university's evolving AI needs, UNSW has developed a framework that aims to guide staff with the knowledge and skills to navigate in an AI-driven academic environment.

Section 'AI capability framework for teaching staff'

UNSW's AI Guidelines and Framework | UNSW Staff Teaching Gateway


UNSW activated Microsoft Copilot with Commercial Data Protection for all staff and students with a zID in May 2024, providing a secure platform where sensitive information is stored and accessed only by authorised staff.

In May 2024, UNSW activated Microsoft Copilot with Commercial Data Protection for all staff and students with a zID. The protected version provides staff and students with a secure platform to ensure that sensitive information is securely stored and accessed only by authorised staff.

Section 'Appropriate Use of Generative AI' > Guideline 2 > Why Microsoft Copilot?


UNSW College permits AI tools for refining writing only when an AI assessment icon indicates it is allowed, for purposes including refining spelling and grammar, revising style and tone, improving clarity, improving vocabulary, checking similarity, assisting proofreading, and self-marking against a rubric.

If an AI assessment icon says you can refine your writing with AI tools or as a copyediting tool, you may be permitted to use these tools for the following: Refine spelling and grammar. Revise style and tone. Improve clarity and coherence of writing. Improve vocabulary. Check your document for similarity to online sources. Assist in proofreading. Self-mark an assessment against a marking rubric.

Section 'Appropriate Use of Generative AI' > Guideline 3 (Refining Writing)


UNSW warns students that generative AI tools may produce invalid or unreliable information ('fabrications' or 'hallucinations') and advises them to verify the accuracy of AI outputs.

Verify accuracy of AI outputs. GenAI tools could produce invalid or unreliable information ('fabrications' or 'hallucinations'). Book an appointment with the Academic Skills team if you need guidance.


UNSW has an AI leadership group that serves as a clearinghouse for critical issues and strategic initiatives and plays a pivotal role in guiding enterprise decisions on AI.

UNSW has an AI leadership group that serves as an overall clearinghouse for addressing critical issues and strategic initiatives. It plays a pivotal role in guiding enterprise decisions.


UNSW has adopted Microsoft Copilot, Adobe Firefly, and Scite.ai as its approved AI tools for staff use.

Identification and practical application of adopted AI tools at UNSW: Microsoft Copilot, Adobe Firefly, Scite.ai

AI capability framework table > Technology focus area


UNSW's AI Leadership Group endorsed and published principles on the Ethical and Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence at UNSW in 2024, designed to regulate AI use, support a positive approach, and promote world-leading AI research.

UNSW's AI Leadership Group has recently endorsed and published principles on the Ethical and Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence at UNSW. These are to be used to steer and support the use of AI and generative AI appropriately at the University. UNSW aims to provide a safe and digitally secure environment relating to the use of generative AI, for both students and staff. The principles are designed to regulate the use of AI (including generative AI), support a positive approach to and promote world-leading AI research.

Are you aware of UNSW's new AI principles? | Inside UNSW


UQ course profiles must clearly state if, when, and how AI (including Machine Translation) is allowed. Two options exist: Option 1 prohibits AI in in-person assessment; Option 2 permits AI use with mandatory referencing.

In semester 1, 2026 the options in course profiles for each assessment remain the same as semester 2, 2025, these are: Option 1: Cannot use AI. AI is prohibited through in-person assessment. Option 2: Can use AI. AI use must be referenced.

UQ's approach to AI use and academic integrity expectations section


UQ has disabled the Turnitin AI writing indicator functionality for all assessments from Semester 2, 2025, citing that AI detection tools are flawed and unreliable.

AI detection tools, including Turnitin, are flawed and unreliable. They cannot definitively determine whether text, ideas, or structures were generated by AI. At UQ we had the Turnitin AI detection tool available for staff to use, this tool was disabled in mid 2025.


At UQ, the use of AI outputs without attribution, and contrary to any direction by teaching staff, is a form of plagiarism and constitutes academic misconduct.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in assessment section


Microsoft Copilot Chat is UQ's enterprise AI tool, available to UQ staff and students, and the UQ Library says it provides a higher level of data security and privacy than other AI tools.

Microsoft Copilot Chat is UQ's enterprise AI tool, available to UQ staff and students. Because Copilot Chat is UQ's enterprise system, it provides a higher level of data security and privacy than other AI tools.

What is Microsoft Copilot Chat and Why use Copilot sections

Microsoft Copilot Chat - UQ enterprise AI tool


UQ says students must acknowledge where they used AI in assessment, including direct quotes or paraphrases of AI-generated content and use of AI tools for summarising, brainstorming, planning, editing, or proofreading.

You must acknowledge where you used AI in assessment, including where you have directly quoted or paraphrased AI-generated content or used tools to summarise readings, brainstorm ideas, plan your process, or for editing or proofreading purposes.

Acknowledging and referencing AI section

Guide to acknowledging and referencing AI


University of Tokyo will not uniformly prohibit generative AI tools like ChatGPT in education; instead, it actively explores their potential while continuing dialogue on practical knowledge and long-term impact.

東京大学の方針として、ChatGPTを始めとした言語生成系AIツールの教育現場での利用を一律に禁止することはしません。その問題点を理解しつつも教育・研究・業務利用における可能性を積極的に探り、活用する上での実践的な知識や注意、長期的な影響に対する対話を継続し、発信していく方針を取ります。

As a University of Tokyo policy, we will not uniformly prohibit the use of language-generation AI tools such as ChatGPT in educational settings. While understanding the issues, we will actively explore their potential for education, research, and administration, and continue dialogue on practical knowledge, precautions, and long-term impact.

AIツールの授業における利用について（ver. 1.0）


UTokyo does not enforce a blanket prohibition on generative AI tools; it actively explores their potential and provides practical guidance.

The University of Tokyo does not enforce a blanket prohibition on the use of generative AI tools. Instead, we are actively exploring their potential and plan to provide practical guidance for their use.

Notification to Students on the Use of AI Tools in Classes (ver 1.0)


UTokyo states it is unacceptable to present AI-generated text as one's own when submitting class assignments.

It is unacceptable to present text generated by AI tools as your own when submitting class assignments.


UTokyo warns students to never input confidential information, personal information, or unpublished research results into AI tools, as the information might be leaked or used for AI training.

Information entered into AI tools can potentially be used in some form for AI training. Never input confidential information, personal information, or unpublished research results, as the information might be leaked.


University of Tokyo will not uniformly prohibit generative AI tools like ChatGPT in educational settings, per official policy signed by the Executive Vice President.

The University of Tokyo will not uniformly prohibit the use of natural language-generation AI tools, such as ChatGPT, in educational settings.

Policy on the use of AI tools in classes


UTokyo leaves decisions on AI tool use in individual classes to faculty, who should decide based on maximizing educational effectiveness rather than following a blanket university rule.

言語生成系AIを使わせる・使わせない・どう使うかという判断も、教員やそのグループが教育効果を最大にすることを目標に行うべきものであると考えます。

Decisions on whether to allow or prohibit generative AI, or how to use it, should be made by faculty with the goal of maximizing educational effectiveness.

AIツールの授業における利用について（ver. 1.0）


UTokyo requires instructors who allow AI use to explain associated risks to students: information leakage, data concentration in few companies, copyright concerns, and potential bias.

言語生成系AIを利用する場合には、学生に対し、利用に付随する①個人情報や機密情報の漏洩の危情報の漏洩の危険性、②限られた企業への情報集中の助長、③著作権侵害の懸念、④学習された内容に偏りが生じる可能性があることなど、現在社会で指摘されている問題点があることも合わせてご説明ください。

When allowing AI use, instructors should explain to students: (1) risk of personal/confidential information leakage, (2) concentration of information in few companies, (3) copyright infringement concerns, (4) potential bias in learned content.

AIツールの授業における利用について（ver. 1.0）


UTokyo states that submitting AI-generated answers by copy-pasting them entirely provides no learning effect and should basically not be permitted.

言語生成系AIで作成された解答を丸ごとコピー・ペーストして提出することは、学生にとって何ら学習効果もなく、基本的には認めるべきではありません。

Submitting answers generated by AI by copying and pasting them entirely provides no learning effect for students and should basically not be permitted.

AIツールの授業における利用について（ver. 1.0）


UTokyo warns faculty not to over-rely on AI detection tools, as they are insufficient evidence of inappropriate student AI use given the rapid evolution of generative tools.

AIによって生成された文章であるかの検出ツールは過信しない。生成ツール自身が急速に変化する中で過信はできませんし、ましてや学生が不正に言語生成系AIを利用した証拠としては不十分であるという認識を持っていただきたいと思います。

Do not over-rely on AI detection tools. They cannot be trusted as the generators themselves change rapidly, and their judgments are insufficient as evidence of inappropriate AI use by students.

AIツールの授業における利用について（ver. 1.0）


UTokyo instructs faculty not to input exam questions directly into generative AI tools, as exams are highly confidential documents.

試験問題は機密性が高い文書ですので、基本的に言語生成系AIにそのままの形で入力しないでください。

Exam questions are highly confidential documents, so in principle do not input them directly into generative AI tools.

AIツールの授業における利用について（ver. 1.0）


UTokyo centers its university-wide generative AI service on Microsoft Copilot, leveraging existing Microsoft contracts for low operational and cost burden.

全学構成員向けの生成AIサービスは，当面，Microsoft Copilotによる生成AIチャットの提供を中心として位置付けます．Microsoft社との既存の契約の下で提供されるクラウドサービスであり，大学の運用負担・費用負担が小さいためです。

For now, the university-wide generative AI service will center on Microsoft Copilot for AI chat, as it is a cloud service provided under existing Microsoft contracts with low operational and cost burden for the university.

当面の全学構成員向け生成AIサービス提供方針について


UTokyo does not uniformly prohibit generative AI tools; it actively explores their potential in education and research while providing practical usage guidance.

東京大学では，生成AIツールの利用を一律に禁止することはせず，教育・研究等における利用の可能性を積極的に探るとともに，活用上の実践的な注意を発信していく方針を取っています．

UTokyo does not uniformly prohibit generative AI tools, and takes a policy of actively exploring their potential in education and research while disseminating practical precautions.

当面の全学構成員向け生成AIサービス提供方針について


UTokyo leaves the decision on whether to allow AI tools and the conditions for their use to the discretion of individual instructors, varying by class.

The decision whether or not to allow the use of generative AI tools will depend on the class. This decision, along with the conditions for their use, is left to the discretion of individual instructors.


UTokyo advises faculty to test their own assignments with generative AI tools to understand how well AI can complete them, and use this understanding to inform assessment design.

Try to make generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, Bing AI, and Bard do the assignments and exams you have given in the past. Determine how well your assignments can be completed by generative AI tools like ChatGPT and incorporate this understanding into the design of your educational policies and methods.


UTokyo requires instructors to clearly state their AI stance per class/assignment, and when allowing AI use, to explain risks: information leakage, data concentration, copyright concerns, and potential bias.

Clearly state your stance as instructor on the use of generative AIs for each class and assignment. If you do allow the use of generative AIs, please also explain to the students the issues that are currently known, including 1) the risk of leakage of personal and confidential information, 2) the increased collection of information by a small number of companies, 3) concerns about copyright infringement, 4) the possibility of biases in the learned content.


UTokyo warns faculty that AI detection tools should not be over-relied upon, as their judgments are insufficient evidence of inappropriate student AI use.

Do not rely too heavily on tools that claim to detect whether a given piece of text was generated by AI. Those tools should not be over-relied upon as the generators themselves are changing rapidly. The judgments of such tools are insufficient to use as evidence that a student has inappropriately used generative AIs.


UTokyo policy states that even when AI use is allowed, simply copying and pasting AI-generated answers should not be accepted as it provides no learning effect.

Even when students are allowed to use generative AIs, simply copying and pasting the answers generated by the AI and submitting them should not be accepted, as that would provide no learning effect for the students.


UTokyo provides Gemini and Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat as university-wide contracted AI chat services; there is no university-wide ChatGPT contract.

東京大学で全学的に契約している生成AIサービスの中で，チャット形式のものとして，主に以下の2つのサービスがあります: Gemini, Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat. なおよくお問合せいただきますが，ChatGPTについては全学での契約はありません。

Among university-wide contracted generative AI chat services, UTokyo primarily offers Gemini and Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat. Note: there is no university-wide ChatGPT contract.


UTokyo warns that using AI-generated results as-is may entail future legal risks related to copyright and design rights.

It has been suggested that the output of AI tools, not just generative ones, may potentially pose problems related to copyright and design rights. Therefore, it is important to note that using generated results as is may entail legal risks in the future.


UTokyo provides AI features embedded in multiple platforms (Zoom AI Companion, Slack AI, Cisco AI Assistant, Slido AI, Copilot in Teams) through university-wide contracts.

ZoomにおけるAI Companion, UTokyo SlackにおけるSlack AI, WebexにおけるCisco AI アシスタント, SlidoにおけるSlido AI, Microsoft TeamsにおけるCopilot in Teams

UTokyo also provides AI features embedded in Zoom (AI Companion), Slack (Slack AI), Webex (Cisco AI Assistant), Slido (Slido AI), and Teams (Copilot in Teams) as part of university-wide contracts.


UTokyo has established security guidelines for generative AI use (March 2024), referenced in the AI service policy.

生成AIの利用にあたっては，以下で説明している注意事項なども参照してください。東京大学における生成AI利用に係るセキュリティガイドライン（2024年3月12日）

When using generative AI, please refer to the following precautions: UTokyo Security Guidelines for Generative AI Use (March 12, 2024).

当面の全学構成員向け生成AIサービス提供方針について


UTokyo's utelecon portal maintains a Policies and Guidelines index page linking to BYOD policy, generative AI information, and AI tools notifications.

Policies and Guidelines index page on utelecon. Links to BYOD policy, generative AI information, AI tools notification, and other policies.


Tsinghua University prohibits students from directly copying or mechanically paraphrasing AI-generated text, code, or other output and submitting it as academic coursework.

鼓励同学们在遵守课程规定的前提下积极探索人工智能工具辅助学习，但严禁将人工智能生成的文本、代码等内容直接复制或简单转述后作为学业成果提交。

【深改进行时】《清华大学人工智能教育应用指导原则》发布


Tsinghua University prohibits using AI to replace academic training that graduate students are expected to complete independently, and strictly forbids AI-assisted ghostwriting, plagiarism, and fabrication in theses, dissertations, and practical achievements.

禁止用人工智能代替本应由本人进行的学术训练，严禁使用人工智能实施代写、剽窃、伪造等行为。

学位论文及实践成果篇 section, graduate student restrictions paragraph

【深改进行时】《清华大学人工智能教育应用指导原则》发布


Tsinghua University prohibits teachers and students from using sensitive information, classified data, or unauthorized data to train or operate AI models.

「数据安全」原则划出清晰红线，严禁师生使用敏感信息、涉密数据或未授权数据训练或驱动人工智能模型。

【深改进行时】《清华大学人工智能教育应用指导原则》发布


Tsinghua University's Guiding Principles establish five core principles for AI in education: principal responsibility (AI as auxiliary tool, teachers and students as primary agents), compliance and integrity, data security, prudence and critical thinking, and fairness and inclusiveness.

「总则」部分明确了学校「积极而审慎」的基本立场，并提出「主体责任」「合规诚信」「数据安全」「审慎思辨」「公平包容」五大核心原则。

总则 section, opening paragraph on core principles

【深改进行时】《清华大学人工智能教育应用指导原则》发布


Tsinghua University affirms that AI must remain an auxiliary tool and that teachers and students are the primary agents in teaching and learning (principal responsibility principle).

「主体责任」原则强调人工智能始终是辅助工具，师生才是教学与学习的主导者。

【深改进行时】《清华大学人工智能教育应用指导原则》发布


Tsinghua University requires teachers and students to disclose their use of AI and AI-generated content in accordance with regulations, as part of the 'compliance and integrity' principle.

「合规诚信」原则要求师生对人工智能使用情况及生成内容依规进行披露声明，严禁学术不端。

【深改进行时】《清华大学人工智能教育应用指导原则》发布


Tsinghua University advises instructors to determine how AI should be used according to course objectives, clearly explain AI usage norms to students at the start of each course, and remain responsible for AI-generated teaching materials.

建议教师们基于教学目标自主制定人工智能的应用方式与程度，在课程开始时向学生明确说明使用规范，并对人工智能生成的教学内容负责。

教学篇 section, instructor guidance paragraph

【深改进行时】《清华大学人工智能教育应用指导原则》发布


Tsinghua University requires graduate supervisors to provide normative guidance on AI use and maintain full-process oversight to ensure the integrity of academic training and the originality of theses, dissertations, and practical achievements.

研究生指导教师需在此过程中提供规范性指导并进行全过程监督，确保学术训练的完整性和学位论文及实践成果的原创性。

学位论文及实践成果篇 section, supervisor responsibilities paragraph

【深改进行时】《清华大学人工智能教育应用指导原则》发布


Tsinghua University urges vigilance toward AI 'hallucinations' and stresses multi-source verification to guard against cognitive complacency from overreliance on AI (prudence and critical thinking principle).

「审慎思辨」原则提醒师生警惕人工智能「幻觉」，应通过多源验证防范因过度依赖导致的思维惰化。

【深改进行时】《清华大学人工智能教育应用指导原则》发布


Tsinghua University's Guiding Principles call for identifying and mitigating algorithmic bias and the digital divide to ensure technology serves the public good (fairness and inclusiveness principle).

「公平包容」原则呼吁主动识别并努力降低算法偏见与数字鸿沟，推动技术向善。

【深改进行时】《清华大学人工智能教育应用指导原则》发布


Tsinghua University explicitly encourages and supports faculty and students to pursue innovative applications of AI in teaching and learning, and commits to recognizing and promoting exemplary practices.

学校积极鼓励并支持全体师生勇于探索人工智能在教育教学中的创新性应用，并将对优秀实践给予肯定与推广。

未来已来 section, innovation encouragement paragraph

【深改进行时】《清华大学人工智能教育应用指导原则》发布


UCL uses a 3-category assessment framework for GenAI: Category 1 requires own work only; Category 2 permits GenAI with acknowledgement; Category 3 includes essential GenAI use as part of the assessment.

For Category 1, you might use GenAI tools to help you revise and prepare, but the work you complete for the assessment should be your own. In Category 2, you could use GenAI to get ideas, help draft your work, or even proofread... Category 3 is a lot like category 2, but there will also be some essential use of GenAI.

GenAI and academic integrity in assessment — UCL


UCL designates Microsoft Copilot as its approved GenAI tool due to its enhanced data protection, positioning it as a more secure alternative to other GenAI services.

Microsoft Copilot is our approved GenAI tool because of its enhanced data protection. This tool is a more secure and safer alternative to other GenAI services.

Generative AI Hub | Teaching & Learning — UCL


UCL defines academic misconduct in the context of GenAI as gaining an unfair advantage over other students; there is no single list of fair and unfair uses as it depends on the assessment category.

Academic integrity is about fairness. If somebody gets an unfair advantage over other students, we consider this academic misconduct. This means that there's no single list of fair and unfair uses of GenAI.


UCL provides Studiosity, a GenAI-powered service available 24/7 to all current students at all levels of study, to support academic writing and referencing skills.

UCL offers a service called Studiosity to support students with their academic writing and referencing skills. The platform uses GenAI and is available 24/7 to all current students, at all levels of study.


UCL permits using GenAI to help with spelling, grammar, and language tone in assessments, but it must not change the content and meaning of what the student has written.

It's okay to use GenAI to help with spelling and grammar, and even with the tone of your language. However, make sure it isn't changing the content and meaning of what you've written. You should always understand the work you submit.


Students may only use GenAI for assessed work (assignments, exams, projects, theses) if expressly permitted by their instructor, supervisor, or program.

For assessed work (assignments, exams, projects, theses, etc.), students may only use GenAI if expressly permitted by their instructor, supervisor, or program. Instructors set the conditions for GenAI use in submitted assessed academic work, including when and how its use must be acknowledged.

Teaching & Learning Guidelines - Generative AI


The use of applications to detect AI-generated content is strongly discouraged at UBC due to concerns about effectiveness, accuracy, bias, privacy, and intellectual property. Turnitin AI detection is not enabled.

The use of applications to detect AI-generated content is strongly discouraged at this time, due to concerns about effectiveness, accuracy, bias, privacy, and intellectual property.


Academic integrity: All uses of GenAI at UBC must uphold academic integrity and adhere to the academic misconduct regulations in the UBC Okanagan and Vancouver calendars.


UBC says instructors or teaching assistants cannot require students to use GenAI or any other technology tool that requires sharing personal information unless the tool has undergone a UBC Privacy Impact Assessment review and been approved for use with personal information.

In line with the British Columbia Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), instructors or teaching assistants cannot require that students use GenAI or any other technology tool that requires them to share personal information unless that tool has undergone a UBC PIA review and been approved for use with personal information.

Privacy, security, confidentiality section

Guidelines for all uses of GenAI in Teaching & Learning


Do not enter personal information into any generative AI tool that has not been through UBC's FIPPA compliance assessment (PIA), as to do so may be a breach of privacy.

Do not enter personal information into any generative AI tool that has not been through UBC's FIPPA compliance assessment (Privacy Impact Assessment or PIA), as to do so may be a breach of privacy. Personal information includes names, personal contact information, student numbers, academic history, etc.

Principles for the Use of Generative AI Tools


UBC recognizes generative AI as a tool to assist in tasks, not a replacement for human creativity and judgment, and encourages experimentation within ethical and responsible use boundaries.

UBC also recognizes that generative AI is a tool to assist in our tasks, not a replacement for human creativity and judgment. UBC encourages experimentation and use within the boundaries of ethical and responsible use.


Faculty and staff may use GenAI in teaching and learning so long as this is within the bounds of legal, university, Faculty, or program-level policies and requirements.

Faculty and staff may use GenAI in teaching and learning so long as this is within the bounds of legal, university, Faculty, or program-level policies and requirements, and the guidelines below.


Microsoft Copilot for Organizations is the approved institutional GenAI chatbot at UBC, available to all faculty, students, and staff with UBC credentials, with PIA interim approval.

Microsoft's GenerativeAI Tool Copilot for Organizations is available for UBC faculty, students, and staff from any place you would normally access Copilot, such as copilot.microsoft.com or the Microsoft Edge web browser sidebar. Once you have logged in with your UBC credentials, look for the green Protected label - accompanied by a shield and check-mark icon - to confirm a secure connection.


Graduate students must obtain approval from their supervisor/committee for substantive GenAI use in research and thesis work, and must include a GenAI use statement in their thesis preface.

The substantive (i.e. non-editorial) use by graduate students of Generative AI tools and outputs must be done with full transparency and with the approval of the academic(s) responsible for evaluating the given work in question -- course instructor, research supervisor, or other advisor as appropriate. If GenAI was used in the research described, the drafting of, and/or the preparation of a thesis or dissertation, the Preface must include a concise description of how it was used.

Use of Generative AI - Graduate School at UBC


Use of GenAI in teaching and learning should respect Indigenous data sovereignty and community protocols for use and sharing of Indigenous knowledges, intellectual properties, and data.

Indigenous data sovereignty: Use of GenAI should respect Indigenous data sovereignty and community protocols for use and sharing of Indigenous knowledges, intellectual properties, and data. Harm from false information about Indigenous communities, cultures, knowledges, histories, and contexts should be avoided.


University of California, Berkeley (UCB)

UC Berkeley warns that individuals who accept click-through agreements for AI tools (such as OpenAI and ChatGPT terms of use) without delegated signature authority may face personal liability, including responsibility for compliance with terms and conditions.

Certain generative AI tools use click-through agreements. Click-through agreements, including OpenAI and ChatGPT terms of use, are contracts. Individuals who accept click-through agreements without delegated signature authority may face personal consequences, including responsibility for compliance with terms and conditions.

Personal Liability subsection under Additional Consultation Needed

Appropriate Use of Generative AI Tools | Office of Ethics, Risk, and Compliance Services


UC Berkeley requires researchers to comply with varying license agreement terms before using or training AI tools with materials acquired from library-licensed resources or databases. Violations can result in personal liability and campus-wide loss of access to critical research resources.

Before using or training AI tools with materials acquired from Library-licensed resources or databases, researchers must comply with varying license agreement terms. Violations can result in personal liability and campus-wide loss of access to critical research resources.

Using AI with Library Digital Resources subsection


UC Berkeley states that use of generative AI tools should be consistent with UC Berkeley's Principles of Community and the UC Principles of Responsible AI.

In all cases, use should be consistent with UC Berkeley's Principles of Community and the UC Principles of Responsible AI.

About Generative AI Tools section, opening paragraph


The UC Berkeley Academic Senate recommends that all faculty include a clear statement on their syllabus about course expectations regarding the use of Google Gemini or any other generative AI tool for course-related work. In the absence of such a statement, students may be more likely to use these technologies inappropriately.

We recommend that all faculty include a clear statement on their syllabus about course expectations regarding the use of Google Gemini or any other GenAI tool for course-related work. In the absence of such a statement, students may be more likely to use these technologies inappropriately or fail to utilize them effectively as a learning tool.

Opening letter from the Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate

Generative AI Guidance for Instructors 2025


The UC Berkeley Academic Senate states that generative AI detection tools are increasingly less accurate and that there are no validated generative AI detection tools available.

GenAI detection tools are increasingly less accurate; there are no validated GenAI detection tools.

Section III: Implementation Details, Policy Enforcement Mechanisms


The UC Berkeley Academic Senate provides three sample syllabus statement frameworks for faculty: 'Full AI' (GenAI required), 'Some AI' (limited permitted use with restrictions), and 'No AI' (all GenAI use prohibited). Faculty should modify these to fit their course requirements.

We provide three sample statements. Instructors should modify them to fit their course requirements. The three statements include the two extremes, with the most and least GenAI use. We also include a third option that is approximately in the middle between the two.

Section II: Sample Syllabus Statements, introduction


The UC Berkeley Academic Senate recommends that for assignments where GenAI is not permitted, instructors should adopt enforcement mechanisms such as in-person proctored exams, an additional oral exam component, or a written statement of academic integrity, since no validated GenAI detection tools exist.

GenAI detection tools are increasingly less accurate; there are no validated GenAI detection tools. Therefore, assignments or learning activities where GenAI is not permitted should consider adopting one or more of the following solutions: Written Statement of Academic Integrity; In-person proctored exams/activities; An additional interview component (or oral exam) to an assignment where students are graded on an explanation of their work.


The UC Berkeley Academic Senate's 'Some AI' syllabus framework requires students to include an acknowledgement of their use of any generative AI system in submitted work, along with the prompts used and how the output was utilized.

When assignments in the course permit or incorporate the use of GenAI tools, the assignment will ask you to include an acknowledgement of your use of any type of GenAI in your submitted work and share the prompts and outputs utilized at the time of submission. The suggested format is as follows: I acknowledge the use of [insert AI system(s) and link] to [specific use of GenAI]. The prompts used include [list of prompts]. The output from these prompts was used to [explain the use].

Section II: Sample Syllabus Statements, 'Some AI' permitted use cases


At UC Berkeley, publicly-available information classified as Protection Level P1 may be freely used in generative AI tools.

Publicly-available information (Protection Level P1) can be used in generative AI tools.

Allowable Use by Data Classification section


The UC Berkeley Academic Senate advises that for assignments where instructors encourage or require GenAI tools, instructors must ensure students have access to the necessary computing resources. If non-campus-sanctioned resources are required, the instructor is responsible for providing access.

For any assignments where the instructor encourages or requires the use of GenAI tools, instructors should ensure that students have access to the necessary computing resources to run those GenAI tools. If non-campus-sanctioned resources are required, it is the instructor's responsibility to provide access to those resources.

Section III: Implementation Details, Required Access to GenAI Tools


UC Berkeley requires users to use UC-licensed AI tools rather than individual consumer accounts to benefit from UC's contractual data protections when working with information more sensitive than Protection Level P1.

UC has license agreements for certain AI tools, which provide protection for use with more sensitive information. It is important to be sure you are using licensed tools, rather than individual consumer accounts, to benefit from UC's contractual protections.


At UC Berkeley, AI tools procured by individual units must adhere to the approved Protection Level limitations advised by that unit, and units should clearly advise staff and users of the appropriate use and Protection Level limitations of their AI tools.

Use of AI tools procured by units separately from the campus or systemwide agreements mentioned above must also adhere to the approved Protection Level limitations advised by the unit to ensure compliance with the agreement and appropriate protections relative to the safety features of the tool. Units offering such tools should clearly advise staff and users as to the appropriate use and Protection Level limitations of the AI (and all) tools that they offer.


UC Berkeley prohibits the use of generative AI tools to complete academic work in a manner not allowed by the instructor.

Completion of academic work in a manner not allowed by the instructor.


UC Berkeley prohibits entering personal, confidential, proprietary, or otherwise sensitive information classified as Protection Level P2, P3, or P4 into generative AI tools, unless specifically allowed under UC's negotiated contracts with AI providers.

Unless specifically stated in the 'Allowable Use' section above, no personal, confidential, proprietary, or otherwise sensitive information may be entered into or generated as output from models or prompts. Such information includes: Student records subject to FERPA, Non-public instructional materials, Proprietary or unpublished research, Any other information classified as Protection Level P2, P3, or P4 (unless specifically allowed under UC's contracts).


UC Berkeley prohibits entering FERPA-protected student records, non-public instructional materials, and proprietary or unpublished research into generative AI tools.

Such information includes: Student records subject to FERPA; Non-public instructional materials; Proprietary or unpublished research.


UC Berkeley requires that any new use of generative AI in studies or work must receive approval from the instructor or responsible unit head, and users should complete the AI Essentials Training and consult the CERC-AIR committee.

If you are considering a new use of Generative AI in your studies or work, it is your responsibility to consider the ethics and risks involved and obtain approval from your instructor/responsible unit head. Be sure to take the AI Essentials Training and consult CERC-AIR, a committee that assesses and offers guidance for mitigating AI risks.


UC Berkeley warns that AI use involving highly-consequential automated decision-making requires extreme caution and should not be employed without prior consultation with appropriate campus entities including the responsible unit head. Examples include legal analysis, recruitment/personnel decisions, replacing represented employees, facial recognition security tools, and grading or assessment of student work.

Use of AI that involves highly-consequential automated decision-making requires extreme caution, and should not be employed without prior consultation with appropriate campus entities, including the responsible Unit head, as such use could put the University and individuals as significant risk. Examples include, but are not limited to: Legal analysis or advice; Recruitment, personnel, or disciplinary decision-making; Seeking to replace work currently done by represented employees; Security tools using facial recognition; Grading or assessment of student work.


UC Berkeley's Office of Ethics, Risk and Compliance provides centralized resources and guidance on the ethical and appropriate use of artificial intelligence, specifically generative AI, with a focus on privacy and compliance with existing laws and policies.

The Office of Ethics, Risk and Compliance is providing resources and guidance about how to use artificial intelligence (AI), specifically generative AI, in an ethical and appropriate manner. This page will help guide you to available tools with a focus on privacy and compliance with existing laws and policies.

Artificial Intelligence | Office of Ethics, Risk, and Compliance Services


UC Berkeley states that units offering AI tools separately from campus or systemwide agreements should clearly advise staff and users of the appropriate use and Protection Level limitations of those tools.

Units offering such tools should clearly advise staff and users as to the appropriate use and Protection Level limitations of the AI (and all) tools that they offer. Units are encouraged to use and refer people to the campus Data Classification Standard and Guidelines for assistance with determining the Protection Level of data being contemplated for use in unit-provided AI tools.


UC Berkeley offers an 'AI Essentials' training for employees — a approximately 30-minute course covering foundational AI concepts, UC policies regarding AI tool usage, and opportunities for application in higher education.

UC Berkeley AI Essentials — ~30-minute employee training covering foundational AI concepts, UC policies regarding the usage of AI tools, and opportunities for application in higher ed. Authentication required.

UC Berkeley AI Essentials section on the guidance page

Guidance on the use of AI | Berkeley AI Hub


The University of California system has established Responsible AI Principles comprising eight principles: Appropriateness; Transparency; Accuracy, Reliability and Safety; Fairness and Non-Discrimination; Privacy and Security; Human Values; Shared Benefit and Prosperity; and Accountability.

UC has several AI principles: Appropriateness; Transparency; Accuracy, Reliability and Safety; Fairness and Non-Discrimination; Privacy and Security; Human Values; Shared Benefit and Prosperity; and Accountability.

OL Play 2 section, referencing UC Berkeley's AI policy context

Responsible Use of Generative AI - UC Berkeley 2025


UC Berkeley has AI risk assessment pre-screening questions that employees can use to gauge the level of risk involved for an AI use case where AI is integrated into a product, service, or feature at the university. Depending on the risk level determined, the CERC-AIR subcommittee may be engaged for a broader risk assessment.

UC Berkeley also has AI risk assessment pre-screening questions that can be used by employees to gauge the level of risk involved for an AI use case (whereby AI is integrated into a product, service or feature at the university). Depending on the level of risk determined, a subcommittee may be engaged and the broader risk assessment conducted.

OL Play 2 section, Tools & Resources, referencing UC Berkeley's AI governance


A student using any unacknowledged content generated by artificial intelligence within a summative assessment as though it is their own work constitutes academic misconduct, unless explicitly stated otherwise in the assessment brief.

University of Cambridge Blended Learning Service


Staff must avoid inputting confidential, sensitive or personal information into GenAI tools unless warranted and only in accordance with guidance. Inputting data into a free or unlicensed GenAI tool could be considered equivalent to putting it into the public domain, signifying a potential personal data breach.

Regardless of the work being undertaken, it is recommended that staff avoid inputting confidential, sensitive or personal information into GenAI tools unless warranted and only in accordance with this guidance.

AI guidance – Guidance for University of Cambridge Staff on the Administrative Use of Generative AI

University of Cambridge Information Compliance Office

By contrast, inputting data into a free or unlicensed GenAI tool could be considered equivalent to putting it into the public domain – signifying a potential personal data breach.


The University's standard licensed GenAI tools are Microsoft 365 Copilot, Google Gemini, and Google NotebookLM. Use of other licensed GenAI tools is not prohibited but must be procured in accordance with applicable procurement policy, including completion of risk assessments such as DPIAs and/or ISRAs. The public, free versions of Copilot, Gemini and NotebookLM must not be used for University activities.

The University’s standard licensed GenAI tools are Copilot, Gemini and NotebookLM, and these are the tools that should be used to process personal data, where necessary, for which the University is responsible.

Use of other licenced GenAI tools is not prohibited, but such tools must be procured in accordance with any applicable procurement policy or process, including but not limited to the completion of any requisite risk assessments such as DPIAs and/or ISRAs.


All GenAI outputs must be thoroughly evaluated by a human being before they are used. Use of GenAI must be acknowledged if it makes a significant and unrevised contribution to a substantive or impactful piece of work. Staff are responsible for ensuring any use of GenAI is conducted reasonably, lawfully and in conjunction with relevant University policies.

Risk mitigation(s): Ensure that all GenAI outputs are thoroughly evaluated by a human being before they are used. Ensure use of GenAI is acknowledged if it is used to make a significant and unrevised contribution to a substantive or impactful piece of work such as the production of content for formal policies or strategic reports.

Ultimately, staff are responsible for ensuring any use of GenAI is conducted reasonably, lawfully and in conjunction with relevant University policies and procedures.


Staff should not rely on AI detection software as it is not proven to be accurate or reliable and provides no evidence to support investigations into the use of GenAI.

Not relying on AI detection software as it is not proven to be accurate or reliable and provides no evidence to support investigations into the use of GenAI.