University of Liverpool

Purpose  This policy sets out the University of Liverpool’s requirements for the use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in learning, teaching and assessment.   It establishes a clear institutional baseline for responsible use, transparency, academic integrity, accessibility, data protection, copyright and governance, while supporting AI literacy and assessment design that prepares students for further study, work and global citizenship in an AI enabled world.  Scope  This policy applies to all students and staff engaged in learning, teaching, and assessment.  It should be read alongside the Code of Practice on Assessment (including the Academic Integrity Policy), the University’s data protection and accessibility requirements, and any approved programme, School, Department or Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body requirements that are more restrictive.  The appropriate use of GenAI varies by discipline and professional context. Schools, Departments, programme teams and relevant PSRBs may set more restrictive expectations than this institutional baseline, and where such requirements exist, they must be followed.  Medical, clinical and other professionally regulated programmes may have additional obligations, including Fitness to Practice, patient safety and PSRB requirements. In these contexts, programme teams must ensure that generative AI use and tier decisions remain consistent with those obligations.  Principles  Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) must not replace a student’s own thinking or work or be used in ways that misrepresent what the student can do. Use of GenAI must be lawful, ethical, inclusive, and proportionate. Students must understand that GenAI outputs may be inaccurate, biased, incomplete, or misleading, and must always exercise critical judgement.  The University will support students and staff to develop GenAI literacy so that GenAI can be used critically, effectively, ethically, and transparently in academic work and professional practice, including the ability to select appropriate tools and agents for specific learning, teaching, assessment, and professional tasks.  Students must declare or acknowledge use where required by the assessment, local guidance or University requirements.  Assessment requirements  All assessments must state clearly whether, and to what extent, generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) may be used.  When setting these requirements, staff will use the University’s approved tiered framework for GenAI permissions in assessment (Table 1: 4.7).  Where the applicable GenAI tier is not explicitly stated for an assessment, the default permission will be Tier 2, except for invigilated exams, which will default to Tier 1, in line with the approved framework. For each assessment, Canvas (or an equivalent alternative where Canvas is not used) will clearly state the applicable permissions-framework tier and any associated permissions or restrictions, so students understand what is permitted, restricted, or prohibited Students must satisfy the requirements set for each assessment. Use of GenAI beyond the stated requirements would normally constitute academic misconduct. 

Collecté: 2026-10-08 · 33–52
SHA-256: d7e13a6397e57b238694d4a03cbb6ad75002047a3310ac72d031c4565bcd004c

Data protection and confidentiality  Any use of generative AI must comply with UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the University’s data protection requirements. Personal, sensitive, confidential, unpublished or otherwise restricted information must not be entered into public or consumer AI tools.  Where proposed use involves University data, personal data or system integration, students must follow the University’s approved security, procurement and data protection processes, including completion of a Data Protection Impact Assessment where required.  Research and thesis activity must also comply with the University’s research integrity, ethics and generative artificial intelligence-in-research guidance, including requirements on research data governance.  Copyright and intellectual property  Materials that are copyrighted, licensed, unpublished, or otherwise protected must not be uploaded to generative AI tools without appropriate permission, licence, or other lawful basis. This includes teaching materials, student work, unpublished research outputs, and subscription content. Use of University-approved systems does not remove the requirement to comply with copyright, licensing, contractual or professional obligations.  Accessibility and inclusive practice  The University will take an inclusive approach to learning, teaching and assessment and will make reasonable adjustments where required for students with a disability, in line with institutional policy and the Equality Act 2010.  Some students with a disability may use assistive technologies, including tools with AI-enabled functions, as part of approved reasonable adjustments. The use of AI-enabled assistive technologies must remain consistent with assessment conditions, including the applicable GenAI tier, and with the University’s academic integrity requirements.  In designing teaching and assessment, unnecessary barriers should be reduced through inclusive design, clear expectations, and proportionate support.  Use of University approved AI tools’  For any University-related activity that involves University data, only University-approved AI environments must be used, and they must be accessed via University credentials with the appropriate institutional protections enabled.  AI-enabled tools must not be procured, adopted or integrated for University purposes outside approved University processes.

Collecté: 2026-10-08 · 81–98
SHA-256: d7e13a6397e57b238694d4a03cbb6ad75002047a3310ac72d031c4565bcd004c

3.5 Submission of Assessment Tasks Generated by Artificial Intelligence This dishonest practice occurs when a student presents assessment tasks (or parts thereof) that have been generated or completed by Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) software contrary to the guidance on using GAI: 1 Each assignment brief should state whether the use of GAI is in line with the 1 generic University position and where it is not, provide specific requirements of that assignment. If the use of GAI is not permitted within an assignment but the student uses it to produce work and then cites it, this is a case of acknowledged by unacceptable use as per 5.3.

Collecté: 2026-10-08 · 169–184
SHA-256: f65c8936eff992f9eb6d92a6f783a5f6d8539175d64d1c86c13b0624e530d361

Approved by Senate chair’s action September 2025; for AY 2025-26 CODE OF PRACTICE ON ASSESSMENT – APPENDIX L Academic Integrity Policy 2026- 27

Collecté: 2026-10-08 · 188–191
SHA-256: f65c8936eff992f9eb6d92a6f783a5f6d8539175d64d1c86c13b0624e530d361

1  Prohibited: No AI use  No GenAI use (including basic tools such as grammar checkers), unless required under an approved student support plan. Enforced via supervision or controlled conditions. Aims to test unaided skills and knowledge.  Must declare GenAI use in line with local guidance and the assessment brief. A record of approved adjustments for students with a support plan will be available to staff, and students will not need to declare the use of assistive technology. 2  Contextual support: Limited / Assistive use  GenAI is permitted in restricted and specified ways (e.g. for planning, editing, or support tasks only). GenAI is not central to demonstrating core learning outcomes; it is a tool to aid learning.  Must declare GenAI use in line with local guidance and the assessment brief.  3  Structural scaffold: exploratory/ critical use  In addition to Tier 2, GenAI use is broadly allowed and encouraged for specific stages or tasks. Students actively engage with AI (for example, generate, critique, iterate, refine) to build AI literacy without making AI the primary producer.  Assessment guidance to include what evidence is required, e.g. could include a record of key AI interactions (such as a summary account of how AI was used, prompts, outputs, edits); critically evaluate AI contributions and cite or attribute use where appropriate.    4  Integrated: Integral / Embedded use  In addition to Tiers 2 and 3, GenAI is a required or core element of the assessment. AI use is expected to achieve the learning outcomes with a focus on responsible, effective and ethical application. Assessment guidance to include what evidence is required, e.g. could include full transparency (for example, documenting process and prompts); reflect on ethical implications, biases, and accuracy; and demonstrate how human input adds value. 

Collecté: 2026-10-08 · 60–76
SHA-256: d7e13a6397e57b238694d4a03cbb6ad75002047a3310ac72d031c4565bcd004c

4.7 When the Academic Integrity Officer is informed of an allegation, they will commence their investigation and will have up to 10 working days from this point to notify the student(s) of the investigation, including details of the alleged offence. The notification will include an invitation to the student(s) to contribute to the investigation by providing a written explanation of the circumstances surrounding the allegation and any representations they wish to make. The student will have 5 working days to respond. If a student chooses not to engage with the investigation, the investigation will proceed and a decision will be made based on the evidence available. 4.8 The Academic Integrity Officer may hold a meeting with the student(s). The student(s) should be given sufficient notice of any meeting, normally a minimum of three working days. The student(s) is entitled to be accompanied at any meeting by one other person (not party to the matters under investigation) acting as their friend. The Guild of Students Advice Centre (Liverpool Guild) has trained advisors who can provide this support and students are encouraged to use them. The student will also be provided with contact details of the University’s Advice and Guidance Team so they know how to access wellbeing support should they feel they need it.

Collecté: 2026-10-08 · 350–368
SHA-256: f65c8936eff992f9eb6d92a6f783a5f6d8539175d64d1c86c13b0624e530d361

Our M365 Copilot Proof of Concept trials As part of the Liverpool 2031 vision and our wider digital transformation programme, the University has been working with Microsoft to explore how Copilot could add value for staff and academic activity. First PoC (October 2025 – January 2026) Our initial PoC involved colleagues from Education, Professional Services and Research. Participants were given paid Copilot licences for three months to test how the tool could support productivity, simplify workflows and enhance academic work. Second PoC (April 2026 – November 2026) Building on what we learned, a second, extended M365 Copilot PoC is now underway. This trial continues our exploration of Copilot, taking forward insights from the first PoC and testing the tool in more depth and across a more targeted range of use cases. Feedback from this phase will help shape future decisions about AI tools, guidance and targeted pilots across the University. To find out more about the M365 Copilot PoC trials, please contact copilot@liverpool.ac.uk. Did you know? You don’t need a full paid licence to start using Copilot today. Copilot Chat is available for free and can be used to ask questions, explore ideas, draft content documents, summarise text, get support with planning, brainstorming or quick research tasks. While Copilot Chat doesn’t connect to institutional data in the same way the full M365 version does, it still offers powerful support for standalone tasks. All University of Liverpool staff can access Copilot Chat via the icon at the top right of Microsoft Edge on your MWS device and more information can be found via our FAQ and Resource links below.

Collecté: 2026-10-08 · 478–489
SHA-256: 31909ee5b4126b4c0e7eb4d8c5b530230daaf61631ad93b0403b68de584d7cdb

6. Right of Appeal 6.1 Students may appeal against the decision of the Board of Examiners in relation to a Category 2, 3 or 4 decision but only on the grounds that there was a procedural error in determining a decision in the conduct of the investigation into the alleged offence. Students may not appeal against the decision of the Board of Examiners other than in accordance with the Code of Practice on Assessment, Appendix F, Assessment Appeals Procedure.

Collecté: 2026-10-08 · 693–699
SHA-256: f65c8936eff992f9eb6d92a6f783a5f6d8539175d64d1c86c13b0624e530d361

5. Time Frames 5.1. There are time frames for submitting an Assessment Appeal at each stage of the process. 5.2. The University reserves the right to not consider appeals if they are submitted outside of the specified time limits. Discretion to accept late appeals will only be given where there are exceptional reasons for late submission, supported by independent evidence. It is the responsibility of the student to provide with their appeal submission their reasons for lateness and to provide evidence to support these reasons. Those considering the appeal may seek advice where appropriate from other departments and services. 5.3. The deadline for submitting the Stage One Assessment Appeal form is within 10 UK working days of the formal release of the relevant results or decision.

Collecté: 2026-10-08 · 211–224
SHA-256: f407aad811bb8dc9e7338f59b3ef4e329e442d19d80815426367bcfd770c5070

14. Stage Two Assessment Appeal 14.1. Students have a right to request a review of the Stage One decision and findings via Stage Two of the procedures. Stage Two Appeals should be submitted within 10 UK working days of the date of the written Stage One response.

Collecté: 2026-10-08 · 642–646
SHA-256: f407aad811bb8dc9e7338f59b3ef4e329e442d19d80815426367bcfd770c5070