Diff de version
University of Oxford
Diffusion unifiée du suivi pour public-release-20260523-001. Le texte complet des pages sources n'est pas publié ; de courts extraits de preuves dans la langue d'origine sont affichés pour le contexte de citation.
Diffusion unifiée
Changements du suivi de version à version générés à partir d'instantanés publics de versions.
différentiel Université of Oxford public-release-20260523-001
Première version suivie.
+45-0
11 # University of Oxford AI policy diff
22 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
33 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
4+other: ChatGPT Edu and Google Gemini, when licensed via the AI Competency Centre, have been approved for processing of Confidential University data by the Information Security team. University data processed through these licensed platforms will not be used to train AI models. Confidential data must only be used with the University's approved, SSO-protected platforms.
5+Evidence (en, 9bbf71bffc82): ChatGPT Edu, licensed via the AI Competency Centre, has been approved for processing of Confidential University data by the Information Security team. University data processed by ChatGPT Edu under an AI Competency Centre licence will not be used to train the AI model.
6+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:58Z
47 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
58 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
9+academic_integrity: Staff setting summative assessment must: declare whether/how students can use AI; review assessment design for alignment with permitted AI use; ensure equality of baseline AI tool provision where authorised; specify declaration forms for student AI use; only identify suspected unauthorised AI use through marking or university-endorsed detection tools (none currently endorsed); and handle misconduct under usual disciplinary regulations.
10+Evidence (en, dc16c703b231): Those setting summative assessment must
- declare whether and how students can use AI in summative assessment, e.g. by a category system for different assignments on courses.
- review their summative assessment design and criteria by task to ensure alignment with the permitted use of AI
- where students are authorised to use AI tools for their summative assessments, ensure that there is an equality of baseline provision of appropriate AI tools.
- specify the forms of declaration expected of students
- only identify suspected unauthorised use of AI in summative assessment through the marking process or through AI detection tools that have university endorsement. NB. as at the date of the l...
11+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:57Z
612 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
713 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
14+academic_integrity: Students undertaking summative assessment must: complete assessment in line with the AI use declaration for each assignment; acknowledge their AI use via a formal declaration in the prescribed format; and understand that submitting work breaching AI specifications constitutes cheating and may constitute plagiarism, handled under usual disciplinary regulations.
15+Evidence (en, dc16c703b231): Students undertaking summative assessment must
- complete summative assessment in line with the declaration as to whether and how AI can be used in each specific assignment they will complete for their course.
- acknowledge their use of AI as part of the summative assessment submission and use a formal declaration in the format prescribed by the assessment setter.
- be aware that submitting work that breaches the specifications defined for a particular assignment constitutes cheating and may constitute plagiarism; cases of suspected unauthorised use of AI will be handled under the usual disciplinary Regulations and using the associated processes.
16+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:57Z
817 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
918 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
19+other: External custom GPTs should not be used to process confidential University data or sensitive personal data. No non-public University data (including confidential, internal, or personal data) may be incorporated in any custom GPT shared with external users.
20+Evidence (en, 9bbf71bffc82): External custom GPTs should not be used to process confidential University data or sensitive personal data. If you are considering inputting internal University data to an external custom GPT, please discuss this with the Information Security GRC team in advance. Any inputting of personal data to an external custom GPT should also be discussed with the Information Compliance team.
21+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:58Z
1022 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
1123 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
24+academic_integrity: Oxford requires postgraduate research students to include a statement on their use of generative AI in their final thesis submission.
25+Evidence (en, 6919aedf3348): Students are required to include a statement on their use of Gen AI in their final submitted thesis. This is effective as of submission in Trinity Term 2026, but it is recommended that such a statement is included in every thesis submitted from the point of publication of this guidance. The statement should be placed immediately after the abstract. The statement must include a formal declaration that any Gen AI use complies with University, divisional and (where applicable) departmental guidance, where and how Gen AI has been used in preparation of the thesis and summarising how specific uses of Gen AI will be referenced in the text
26+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:57Z
1227 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
1328 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
29+academic_integrity: For PGR summative assessment (transfer, confirmation, thesis), the following AI uses are permitted without declaration: local editing tools (grammar assistants, spell-checkers, code debuggers making small local changes); AI for background research, language translation, bibliography creation, and general subject understanding; and AI for coding where coding serves a research purpose but is not the substantive output. Students remain responsible for correctness of any code used.
30+Evidence (en, 6919aedf3348): The use of local editing tools—such as grammar assistants, code debuggers, and spell-checkers—is permitted and need not be declared. These tools only make small, local changes (for example, fixing spelling, grammar, or small pieces of code), usually affecting just a few words or tokens at a time.
The use of AI tools for background research, language translation, creation of bibliography indices and general subject understanding is allowed and does not have to be declared.
Use of Gen AI for coding purposes is permitted, where the coding serves a purpose in the research but is not the substantive output of the project.
31+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:57Z
1432 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
1533 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
34+academic_integrity: For PGR students, the following uses of generative AI are not permitted in summative assessments: substantive original writing by GenAI (verbatim or closely paraphrased for chapters or parts thereof) which constitutes plagiarism; using AI to produce plots or data visualisations directly from prompts; and entering private or confidential data into third-party AI tools.
35+Evidence (en, 6919aedf3348): Substantive original writing by Gen AI, including either verbatim or closely paraphrased use of Gen AI content, for, e.g., chapters, or parts of chapters, including introduction or conclusion chapters or for a literature review, would fall under the definition of plagiarism or be otherwise a failure of research integrity and is therefore not permissible.
The use of generative AI to produce plots or data visualisations directly from prompts is prohibited.
Private or confidential data must not be entered into third-party AI tools.
36+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:57Z
1637 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
1738 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
39+academic_integrity: Unauthorised use of generative AI falls under the University's plagiarism regulations and is subject to academic penalties in summative assessments. Students must learn and practise academic skills of note-taking and clear attribution to differentiate their own work from AI-derived material. Where AI use is authorised, students should give clear acknowledgment of how it has been used.
40+Evidence (en, 9414bd7307cd): Students using AI during their studies must learn and practise the same academic skills of note-taking and clear attribution which are safeguards against plagiarism, ensuring clear differentiation of their own work from any text or material derived from generative AI tools. Unauthorised use of AI falls under the plagiarism regulations and would be subject to academic penalties in summative assessments. Where the use of generative AI in preparing work for examination has been authorised by the department, faculty or programme, students should give clear acknowledgment of how it has been used in their work.
41+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:57Z
1842 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
1943 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
44+other: All cloud-based generative AI tools must be subject to a security risk assessment before being used with University information. Free and open-source services generally cannot complete a full assessment and should not be used for confidential information.
45+Evidence (en, 9bbf71bffc82): Before any processing of Internal or Confidential information using generative AI services, the following steps must be taken to mitigate risk.
1. As with all service providers holding or processing university information, information supplied to the tool in the form of questions or other artefacts is typically stored by the third-party service provider and is subject to the threats from cyber criminals and other malicious actors, such as hostile nation states. Therefore, all cloud-based Generative AI tools should be subject to a security risk assessment before being used. The Information Security GRC Team has a TPSA tool to help complete an assessment. It is generally not possible to com...
46+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:58Z
2047 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
2148 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
49+academic_integrity: The University's policy on AI use in summative assessment is based on three principles endorsed by Education Committee in Trinity term 2025: (1) educational practice must be grounded in values of integrity, honesty and transparency, which must be clearly articulated and frequently discussed; (2) every discrete unit of assessment must be carefully designed to be fit for its specific purposes, clearly articulated to students; (3) every summative assessment must be accompanied by a clear explanation of what appropriate assistance is permitted and what is forbidden, specifying how students should report assistance received.
50+Evidence (en, dc16c703b231): The policy is based on three principles for acceptable use of AI which were endorsed by Education Committee during Trinity term 2025:
- Educational practice in teaching and assessment must be grounded in values of integrity, honesty and transparency. These values need to be clearly articulated and frequently discussed.
- Every discrete unit of assessment must be carefully designed to be fit for its specific purposes. These purposes need to be clearly articulated to students.
- Every element of summative assessment must be accompanied by a clear explanation of what appropriate assistance is permitted and what is forbidden. Where assistance is permitted, the assignment should specify exactl...
51+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:57Z
2252 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
2353 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
54+other: Unapproved AI transcription bots should not be used in Teams meetings. The inbuilt Teams Transcription facility or Microsoft Copilot may be used subject to appropriate data protection considerations. Other AI transcription bot services should be avoided, and meeting organisers should set options to prevent participants from adding unapproved transcription bots.
55+Evidence (en, 9bbf71bffc82): There should be no use of unapproved AI transcription bots in Teams meetings by any participants.
It is permissible to record meetings using the inbuilt Teams Transcription facility or Microsoft's Copilot subject to appropriate data protection considerations.
Use of any AI transcription bot services other than the inbuilt Teams Transcription or Microsoft's Copilot should be avoided.
Meeting options should be set by the organisers so as to prevent internal or external meeting participants from adding unapproved transcription bots.
56+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:58Z
2457 ## Source attribution added
2558 An official source attribution was added to the tracker record.
59+Source https://ctl.ox.ac.uk/ai snapshot ca36f4631166d8e1a2175fc8836878552b4a14fa98d336b0ab4ddc20435456f8
60+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:57Z
2661 ## Source attribution added
2762 An official source attribution was added to the tracker record.
63+Source https://ctl.ox.ac.uk/ai-tools-in-teaching snapshot 9414bd7307cd58218608ce57b4e8bc2f6f1dd910fb69e1747ffcbc21fb7ca0d9
64+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:57Z
2865 ## Source attribution added
2966 An official source attribution was added to the tracker record.
67+Source https://governance.admin.ox.ac.uk/education-committee/policies/ai-use-in-summative-assessment snapshot dc16c703b23186b5ab18fa8cf527cbe294fbe4b153872be7f2a0752a6f28805c
68+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:57Z
3069 ## Source attribution added
3170 An official source attribution was added to the tracker record.
71+Source https://www.infosec.ox.ac.uk/use-generative-ai-services-such-as-chatgpt-safely snapshot 9bbf71bffc824494cb7a1d67b222766e18ac06caeb82946a797b485c0561c17e
72+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:58Z
3273 ## Source attribution added
3374 An official source attribution was added to the tracker record.
75+Source https://www.it.ox.ac.uk/article/university-ai-provision-2026 snapshot 6abb77311f43f70e8af1d23ccb75bbd35bd34098129bb0260b38de9d4effb1f2
76+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:58Z
3477 ## Source attribution added
3578 An official source attribution was added to the tracker record.
79+Source https://www.mpls.ox.ac.uk/graduate-school/information-for-postgraduate-research-students/generative-ai snapshot 6919aedf33483a2f0ea58ff0ecf690348f7d294d0d20bba8049f6e53dea1fa06
80+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-06T00:57:57Z
Comment lire cette différence
Métadonnées de la version du suivi, et non preuve directe du moment de publication universitaire.
Les affirmations récemment extraites sont des ajouts au suivi et ne sont pas nécessairement de nouvelles publications de l'université. Les changements d'instantané source signifient que la même URL a produit un hachage différent ; cela peut concerner le texte de la politique, la mise en page, la navigation ou les métadonnées.
Limite
Métadonnées du suivi uniquement
This tracker is not legal advice, not academic integrity advice, and not an official university statement unless a linked source is the university's own official page.