KU Leuven

A clear misuse of GenAI - where any output was largely generated by GenAI and you were not transparent about using the tool - can be considered an irregularity under Article 84 of the Education and Examination Regulations (OER).

2 basic principles apply for students : A student has full responsibility for what they submit; You make sure that the assignment allows the teaching staff to evaluate which competences you have acquired as a student.

Any behaviour exhibited by individual students (partially) hindering or attempting to hinder a proper assessment of their own or other students' knowledge, comprehension and/or skills will be considered an irregularity and may result in an appropriate penalty. A particular type of irregularity is plagiarism, which involves copying the work of others (including ideas, texts, structures, designs, images, plans, codes, etc.) or one's own previous work in an exact or slightly modified way without adequately acknowledging the sources. Every possession of prohibited resources during an examination (cf. Article 65) is considered an irregularity.

The examiner informs the chair of the examination committee as soon as possible about every irregularity detected during an assessment activity that could affect the decision of the examination committee. The select examination committee will then investigate the severity of the irregularity, hear the student in the presence of the examination ombudsperson, hear the examiner of the course where the irregularity occurred and propose a penalty and/or decide whether to implement a prevention plan. Hearing the student and examiner may be delegated by the select examination committee to members of the same examination committee. The faculty determines which persons are eligible and according to which procedure they are designated. For irregularities relating to possible plagiarism, the select examination committee preferably consults with the faculty expert on irregularities. The final decision on discipline regarding examinations is an independent decision of the examination committee.

The examination committee independently assesses the severity of the irregularities and determines an appropriate penalty. On the grounds of an irregularity committed during the examination, the examination committee may, without prejudice to articles 89 §2 and 90 §2, decide to establish the irregularity during the examination board meeting or an early meeting without imposing a penalty.

REGULATIONS ON EDUCATION AND EXAMINATIONS 2026-2027 as approved by the Academic Council on 31 March 2026 and 30 June 2026

Irrelevant to the finding of fact is: - whether or not the irregularity is the consequence of a deliberate choice of the students, - whether or not the irregularity resulted in an unfair advantage for the parties concerned, - whether or not the students decided to cease the behaviour that can be considered an irregularity.

Pending the decision of the examination committee, the students involved can finish the examinations of the examination period concerned, including the examination in question, but, if necessary, after the confiscation of the items, resources and exam paper under dispute. The students will receive their confiscated personal belongings preferably immediately after the examination and at the latest by the end of the day. The students must keep themselves at the disposal of the invigilators for this purpose.

Once all parties have been heard, the select examination committee and exchange coordinator will compile a file containing, at least, the results obtained at KU Leuven and a proposed penalty. This file will allow the examination committee at the student's home university to determine a final penalty in accordance with their established regulations. The exchange coordinator will then reach out to the student's home university to discuss the next steps and conclusion of the exchange.

1° have taken an invalid examination and have to retake the examination at a time and date set by the faculty; 2° will receive an adjusted mark for the examination of the course or part of the course; 3° will receive a 0 on the examination of the course or a part of the course; 4° will receive a 0 for some or all of the courses for which they took an examination during the examination period in question; 5° will be rejected for one or more courses from the study programme or the credit contract in which the irregularity was detected. In this case, the students in question will receive a 0 for the courses in question in the said examination period and will only be able to take an examination for these courses in the next academic year at the earliest; 6° will be rejected for the study programme or type of contract in which the irregularity was detected. In this case, the students can only re-register in the next academic year at the earliest. The rejected students receive a 0 for some or all of the courses they took an examination on during the examination period in question. This penalty can only be imposed in cases of very severe irregularities. The examination committee decides on the severity of the irregularity; 7° will lose the right to register for the next academic year or for the next two academic years. This penalty applies to all KU Leuven registrations, contracts and study programmes and can only be imposed in combination with a rejection (penalty 6°).

If the examination committee considers it appropriate to impose an expulsion of more than two years or a permanent expulsion on the student as a disciplinary measure because of severe examination fraud, the examination committee can bring the case directly before the Disciplinary Committee. The Disciplinary Committee takes a decision and pronounces a penalty as provided in the disciplinary regulations. The student can appeal to the Disciplinary Appeals Committee. Students can appeal against a decision made by the Disciplinary Appeals Committee to the 'Raad voor betwistingen inzake studievoortgangsbeslissingen' (Council for academic progress disputes) in accordance with the provisions stated in the Higher Education Code.

h) a decision on discipline regarding examinations, being a penalty imposed in response to examination misconduct. A decision on discipline regarding examinations is considered to be any decision of an examination committee concerning an irregularity (articles 84, 85, and 86); An appeal must be submitted through the central procedure laid down for this purpose. In their appeal, students must include at least a factual description of the objections they invoke. In the absence of such a motivation, the appeal will automatically be considered unfounded. The appeal has to be submitted within a period of seven calendar days. For an appeal against an examination decision, this period starts the day after the written announcement of the examination results. For all other appeals, this period starts on the day the student concerned learns about the decision that was made.

Students who are considering to appeal against an examination decision, but wish to wait to make their decision until after receiving feedback also have to submit the appeal within the period of time stated in the previous paragraph. In their application, they must state when the feedback session will take place, or explain why it is not yet clear when the feedback session will take place. On the basis of this information, the appeal body sets a reasonable time limit within which they must submit their arguments. If they do not further substantiate their complaint within this set deadline, their appeal will automatically be considered unfounded.

If the appeal is admissible (i.e. submitted in time, substantive motivation, and against a decision subject to appeal), the student may be heard. Students who indicate in their request that they want to discuss their appeal will be invited to be heard. For other students, the appeal body or their delegate decides whether they wish to engage in a conversation with those students. The individual students personally engage in talks with the appeal body.

The appeal body may delegate the hearing of the student. The Vice Rector for Student Affairs or their substitute makes the final decision for all students, where appropriate, in consultation with their substitute.

This rejection or new decision will be communicated to the students by email within a period of twenty calendar days. This period starts on the day after the internal appeal was submitted. The communication is sent to the email address the students provided when submitting the appeal. The internal appeal body may inform the students within the applicable period that it will issue its decision at a later date. In that case, the time limit for external appeal starts on the day after that date.

Suppose the possibility of filing an internal appeal has been exhausted. In that case, students can appeal to the Raad voor betwistingen inzake studievoortgangsbeslissingen (Council for academic progress disputes) against a decision of the appeal body concerning the categories a) to g), in accordance with the provisions set in the Higher Education Codex, codified on 11 October 2013.

A clear misuse of GenAI - where any output was largely generated by GenAI and you were not transparent about using the tool - can be considered an irregularity under Article 84 of the Education and Examination Regulations (OER). This provision also includes the unauthorised use of GenAI. If an irregularity has been detected, action will be taken in accordance with the procedure described in Article 85 of the Education and Examination Regulations (OER).

Transparency about the use of GenAI in scientific publications, project applications and doctoral theses The use of GenAI needs to be reported in a transparent manner whenever new output is generated.

Your appeal must be filed within seven calendar days of notification of the decision (by letter, email, academic progress file, etc.). Is your appeal late? Then it is automatically inadmissible. For an examination decision, the time period starts the day after the date on which the examination results are announced in the academic progress file. For other decisions, the time period starts the day after the date mentioned on the original decision. If this final day coincides with a Sunday or a public holiday, the time period will be extended to the next working day.

If you are considering filing an appeal, but need feedback or clarification first from your teaching staff or faculty, you can file a provisional appeal. This must be done - just like a regular appeal - within seven calendar days after the decision has been communicated. You must submit a detailed motivation letter within five calendar days after filing the provisional appeal. If you fail to do so within this period, the appeal will automatically be considered inadmissible.

A decision on discipline regarding examinations, being a penalty imposed in response to examination misconduct. A decision on discipline regarding examinations is considered to be any decision of an examination committee concerning an irregularity (articles 84, 85, and 86)

You file an appeal to the internal appeal body, namely the Vice Rector for Student Affairs. You do this via the web form (or via email). During the appeal procedure, a meeting with the Vice Rector for Student Affairs (or a delegate or substitute) is possible. In your motivation letter, you can indicate that you would like a meeting, or the appeal body can invite you to further clarify your appeal. The final decision on an appeal always lies with a Vice Rector.

The Vice Rector for Student Affairs makes the final decision for every KU Leuven student. The appeal body will communicate the decision via your KU Leuven email address. In principle, you will receive the decision within 20 calendar days after submitting your appeal. If the assessment requires more time, you will be informed within the same period.

As a student, you can also file an appeal against the decision of the internal appeal body with the Council for Academic Progress Disputes (in Dutch). The petition to the Council must be submitted within seven calendar days of the electronic notification of the decision of the internal appeal body. If this final day coincides with a Sunday or a public holiday, the time period will be extended to the next working day.

KU Leuven is open to the use of generative AI (GenAI) in teaching and research, and encourages students, lecturers, researchers and staff to use this technology in a responsible and critical manner. Generative AI is a powerful tool. We use it consciously and purposefully: as a complement to, not a replacement for, critical thinking and professional expertise.

Teaching staff are expected to clearly inform students about whether or not they are allowed to use GenAI for assignments such as visual, writing and programming assignments. Students are expected to be transparent about the use of GenAI so that their knowledge, understanding and skills can be assessed fairly and correctly.

KU Leuven has decided to promote a responsible use of Generative AI (GenAI) in education instead of banning it. Teaching staff are expected to clearly inform students about whether or not they are allowed to use GenAI for assignments such as visual, writing and programming assignments. Students are expected to be transparent about the use of GenAI so that their knowledge, understanding and skills can be assessed fairly and correctly. If a student uses GenAI and is not transparent about its use, this may be considered an irregularity (according to article 84 of the Education and Examination Regulations). The guidelines on this web page apply to the whole university. This means that the guidelines on this page apply only if the faculty, the study programme or the teaching staff member has not given any additional information.

Make completing the Transparency Statement part of the assignment. If the completed Transparency Statement is not submitted, the assessment will be considered NA (“Not Attempted”). In cases of doubt regarding the correct use of GenAI, the completed Transparency Statement will be used as evidence. Students should be informed of its important legal significance: if the statement does not correspond to reality (i.e. is falsified), this may lead to disciplinary consequences for the student.

The Code of Conduct determines when referring to GenAI use is required or not. You may deviate from this and also consider asking students to provide additional information about their use of AI. This could include screenshots of the full interaction with GenAI, with relevant parts highlighted, or an explanation of how or why GenAI was used. To gain better insight into GenAI use, you may also ask students to complete a Transparency Statement.

Starting from the academic year 2026–2027, the Code of Conduct and the Transparency Statement will be two separate documents. The Code of Conduct defines what is and is not allowed. You can discuss the Code of Conduct with your students at the beginning of the semester. In the Transparency Statement, students indicate how they used GenAI.

For (strictly) confidential data: use only Copilot logged in with your KU Leuven account. For other data: choose consciously, not automatically. For non-confidential data, you may use other AI tools. For confidential or strictly confidential data, a security check of the tool is mandatory.

Copilot is the preferred tool at KU Leuven. KU Leuven has a contractual agreement with Microsoft that also covers data protection. In addition, our Enterprise environment provides the best technical security, Microsoft does not use entered data for further training, and ICTS ensures the correct settings for all logged-in users.

Do you need a specific application that Copilot doesn't offer? For non-confidential data, you may use other AI tools. For confidential or strictly confidential data, a security check of the tool is mandatory. For intensive professional use, free consumer products are not permitted, as the risk of irresponsible use becomes too great. You will need a licence and must follow the SaaS guidelines (in Dutch).

It's preferred to use Copilot with your KU Leuven account. If you require a specific application and the functionalities are not available via Copilot, you may use AI tools other than the aforementioned Copilot with a KU Leuven account or Copilot Premium with a KU Leuven account for non-confidential data. If the data is confidential or strictly confidential, a security check must be carried out on the AI tool. Free consumer products are not permitted for professional use, as the risk of irresponsible use is too great; you need a licence and must follow the SaaS guidelines (in Dutch).

Microsoft Copilot Chat is a digital AI assistant connected to OpenAI's large language model. KU Leuven has an agreement with Microsoft (for staff and students). This guarantees that Microsoft will not permanently store any data entered or generated. Microsoft will not use any data entered or generated by KU Leuven to train, retrain or improve Microsoft's generative AI models. Thanks to this agreement, M365 Copilot Chat may be used with information of confidentiality levels ❶ and ❷, provided you are logged in with your KU Leuven account.