The University of Melbourne

It’s important your students realise that 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).

Aineistohaku: Section: University policies in relation to Generative AI; extracted text lines 57-57

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.

Aineistohaku: Section: Turnitin Writing Detection Guidance; extracted text lines 37-37

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

Aineistohaku: Section: Is it okay to use GenAI at Melbourne?; extracted text lines 6-6

If you have used an AI tool or technology such as ChatGPT to generate an output which you either paraphrase or direct quote in your writing, you must cite and reference this output as a source in your reference list.

Aineistohaku: Section: Citing AI Output in Reference List; extracted text lines 15-15

While GenAI can produce seemingly valuable or original output, your own perspective, experience and knowledge is what the University and future employers expect. Therefore, knowing what value you add is crucial.

Aineistohaku: Section: Demonstrating Your Knowledge; extracted text lines 60-60

I have cited and referenced outputs from an AI tool or technology in my assessment. Do I also need a declaration? Yes. In addition to a citation or reference, a declaration provides you with an opportunity to describe how you have used an AI tool or technology to complete your assessment. This information assists your readers to understand how AI tools and technologies have been incorporated in your research, writing and learning processes.

Aineistohaku: Section: Acknowledging AI Tools (Declaration Requirement FAQ); extracted text lines 59-60

Make sure you know whether the use of GenAI tools is authorised in the exam, and if so, which tools or specific uses are allowed

Aineistohaku: Section: Open-book exams advice - GenAI authorization check; extracted text lines 58-58

If you use GenAI tools to assist in preparing or completing your exam, it is your responsibility to do so ethically, responsibly and in alignment with University of Melbourne policy.

Aineistohaku: Section: Open-book exams advice - Ethical responsibility; extracted text lines 60-60

Breach types Plagiarism Unauthorised re-use of previous work (self plagiarism) Breach of examination or assessment rules or directions Falsification or misrepresentation of data Unauthorised or undisclosed use of technology (incl. GenAI)

Aineistohaku: Section: Managing Suspected Academic Misconduct - Breach Types; extracted text lines 128-133

Poor academic practice refers to minor and unintentional departures from accepted scholarly conventions or failures to comply with assessment guidelines. Poor academic practice incidents are characterised by inexperience, lack of student knowledge, or poor academic skills, and does not compromise the purpose and/or integrity of the assessment. Importantly, poor academic practice is not academic misconduct, may be treated as an assessment matter and managed within the marking and assessment guidelines set by the Board of Examiners for the subject.

Aineistohaku: Section: Poor Academic Practice Definition and Management; extracted text lines 66-67

As with the similarity report generated by Turnitin, the result of the AI writing detector tool is a prompt for further investigation. Should there be a suspicion that part or all of your submitted assessment has been produced using generative AI, you may be asked to explain your essay and argument (how you developed the argument, what sources you used, how you reached the conclusion you did), or to provide drafts or notes of early versions of the assessment.

Aineistohaku: Section: Advice for Students Regarding Turnitin - Prompt for investigation; extracted text lines 15-16

To submit an appeal, you must complete the online student appeals form within 20 University business days from the date of the original decision.

Aineistohaku: Section: Submitting an Appeal - 20 Business Days Window; extracted text lines 126-126

It follows that 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.

Aineistohaku: Section: Setting Subject Boundaries; extracted text lines 58-58

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

Aineistohaku: Section: University policies in relation to Generative AI, subsection: Can staff use GenAI for marking/grading of student work?; extracted text lines 63-63

Staff can use GenAI tools to help in the preparation of teaching materials, however care must always be exercised to ensure proper use of university IP, and ethical use of GenAI.

Aineistohaku: Section: Staff Teaching Materials Preparation; extracted text lines 61-61

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.

Aineistohaku: Section: AI and assessment, subsection: Is it okay if students use GenAI for language translation or editing their work?; extracted text lines 51-51

Government may wish to develop optional guidance on the use of generative AI in the sector. The Government could also establish communities of practice to share ideas , best practice and lessons learned in generative AI in higher education.

Aineistohaku: Section: Inquiry Submission - Recommendations; extracted text lines 45-47

This BEL+T Guidance on Generative AI (genAI) offers ABP subject coordinators, and other educators in built environments disciplines, some key concepts and definitions in this fast-developing space.

Aineistohaku: Section: BEL+T Guidance Scope; extracted text lines 4-4

In most cases, this means designing subjects so that “secure” assessments, in which learning is assured, account for at least 50% of a subject’s mark (Principle 1).

Aineistohaku: Section: Assuring Learning Guidelines Principle 1; extracted text lines 10-11

The CSHE website includes a range of strategies for using GenAI tools to enhance assessment tasks.

Aineistohaku: Section: Enhancing Assessment Tasks; extracted text lines 47-47

Assuring student learning requires the careful use of ‘secure’ assessment types at key points in the curriculum. Secure assessment types are those for which we can have high confidence that assessment rules were followed and can verify that the student completed the task. This is in contrast to ‘open’ assessments where rules may be more easily circumvented.

Aineistohaku: Section: Assuring Learning at Melbourne; extracted text lines 3-3

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.

Aineistohaku: Section: Data Privacy and AI Training Risks; extracted text lines 41-41

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.

Aineistohaku: Section: Protecting Personal Information; extracted text lines 44-44

When you upload this material to an AI tool, you may be violating the copyright of creators who have not given permission to do this with their material.

Aineistohaku: Section: Respecting Copyright; extracted text lines 47-47

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.

Aineistohaku: Section: Protecting University Intellectual Property; extracted text lines 41-41

Assessment content, metadata and system activity records may be reviewed where necessary to verify authorship, ensure fair assessment conditions, or investigate suspected breaches of University’s policies.

Aineistohaku: Section: LMS Privacy Collection Notice - Assessment records and review; extracted text lines 22-22

Your personal information may be disclosed to: Visiting or honorary academics involved in teaching and grading Decision-makers involved in academic integrity or misconduct processes Service providers including Learning and Management System provider (Instructure Inc) and other integrated educational technologies

Aineistohaku: Section: LMS Privacy Collection Notice - Disclosure to Decision-makers; extracted text lines 30-33

This clarifies that 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.

Aineistohaku: Section: Inquiry Submission - Research Conduct; extracted text lines 229-231

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.

Aineistohaku: Section: Inquiry Submission - Commercial IP and Confidentiality; extracted text lines 252-254

Researchers: Specific guidance for University of Melbourne researchers about how to acknowledge the use of digital assistance tools in research outputs is available at the Research ethics and integrity website.

Aineistohaku: Section: Guidance for Researchers; extracted text lines 8-8

In line with section 5.11 of the Responsible Conduct of Research Policy, research personnel are responsible for assuring the integrity of their research produced with the assistance of digital assistance tools, including but not limited to artificial intelligence (AI) tools. Research personnel must: Document the use of a digital assistance tool (DAT) in their research process Disclose the use of a DAT to research partners, collaborators and in research outputs, including but not limited to publications and theses

Aineistohaku: Section: Responsible Conduct of Research Policy cl. 5.11 obligations; extracted text lines 36-38

Ensure all necessary approvals are obtained to use the DAT, including but not limited to a Privacy Impact Assessment, Information Security Risk Assessment, or ethical review and approval where applicable.

Aineistohaku: Section: Approvals for DAT Use; extracted text lines 39-39

Whether rephrasing text moves beyond minor editing assistance, and therefore impacts the integrity of the research output, depends on whether the rephrasing is beyond that acceptable according to the Australian Standards for Editing Practice. These standards limit editing to language and expression (clarity, grammar, spelling), completeness and consistency. Substantial redrafting of whole paragraphs or larger sections, or translating a substantial body of text into English, falls outside those limits.

Aineistohaku: Section: Australian Standards for Editing Practice and thesis limits; extracted text lines 84-84

A specific case is material provided to supervisors by their graduate researchers. These candidates own their text so it can only be uploaded into an AI with their explicit permission and with a clear statement of the purpose for which it is being uploaded. This also applies to co-authored material such as drafts of papers. Thus, if a supervisor plans to use AI to provide feedback on written material, they must obtain the candidate’s permission to do so, and it is a reasonable expectation on the part of the candidate that this permission be recorded in writing.

Aineistohaku: Section: Supervisor AI Review Permission; extracted text lines 80-81

The University’s Product Innovation Team has developed the AI learning assistant (AILA): a chatbot embedded in the LMS and intended as a learning resource for students.

Aineistohaku: Section: AI Learning Assistant (AILA); extracted text lines 80-80

SparkAI is a secure platform internal to the University of Melbourne that can be accessed by staff (but not by students). It allows staff to explore Generative AI tools and capabilities using information that may be sensitive to the University, such as teaching/assignment materials, potentially copyrighted material, or other data that have Intellectual Property overlays.

Aineistohaku: Section: SparkAI Platform; extracted text lines 67-67

Turnitin’s AI writing detection tool is currently accessible to staff within Canvas as part of its similarity report function, for work submitted in English.

Aineistohaku: Section: Turnitin AI Detection; extracted text lines 32-32

M365 Copilot Chat provides a secure, AI-powered chat experience grounded in web knowledge and powered by GPT. While students are allowed to use GenAI for study, all work submitted for assessment must follow the rules of the assessment and, if AI use is permitted, students must ensure this is acknowledged as described in Academic Integrity: unauthorised or undisclosed use of technology.

Aineistohaku: Section: M365 Copilot Chat - Overview and study rules; extracted text lines 162-162

The University of Melbourne will build awareness among students and staff of their responsibilities around the use of AI tools in the preparation of work and we will manage integrity-related risks posed by AI tools.

Aineistohaku: Section: University of Melbourne AI Principles - Academic and Research Integrity; extracted text lines 8-8