Durham, United Kingdom
Reviewed record
16 reviewed claims
Academic Integrity
Bukti asal
Bukti 1You must not use generative AI to create substantive content for your assessed work that you then present as if it were your own creation.
Source Status
Bukti asal
Bukti 1It applies to students' use of generative AI in summative assessments on Common Awards modules. Its only purpose is to define which uses of generative AI count as academic misconduct in that context.
Academic Integrity
Bukti asal
Bukti 1You must not provide a generative AI with any text or other material produced by others, unless that material is in the public domain, or you have explicit permission to do so, or you have confirmation that the content will not be used to train the AI in question.
Academic Integrity
Bukti asal
Bukti 1The policy requires students to copy and paste a completed AI declaration into summative assignments before submitting them.
Ai Tool Treatment
Bukti asal
Bukti 1It is unadvisable to use generative AI and it may negatively affect your application.
Ai Tool Treatment
Bukti asal
Bukti 1In general, however, other limited uses of generative AI to facilitate your work do not count as academic misconduct, provided that the resulting work still reflects your own engagement with your sources, your own understanding, and your own reasoning and judgments; you clearly acknowledge any use of AI that has substantially informed the content or presentation of your work; and you demonstrate appropriate caution about the limitations of the tools you use.
Pengajaran
Bukti asal
Bukti 1All programmes will make use of a range of assessments clearly identified as either: No GenAI Allowed (including some assessments where AI use is not possible, such as viva); Selective, where it will be specified how GenAI may be used; Allowed, where students may choose whether and how to use GenAI; Embedded, where using GenAI is required.
Ai Tool Treatment
Bukti asal
Bukti 1Asking an AI tool to 'proof read in British English' would be appropriate use (just as asking a friend or relative to proof read would be) as the original 'generation' of the text was by the human applicant.
Source Status
Bukti asal
Bukti 1An update to our GenAI policy was approved by our academic governing body Senate in June 2026.
Source Status
Bukti asal
Bukti 1Institutional Policy on Generative Artificial Intelligence for Learning, Teaching and Assessment, June 2025
Pengajaran
Bukti asal
Bukti 1It is also evident that, whether learning outcomes change significantly or not, marking criteria should be reviewed alongside the assessment redesign process.
Pengajaran
Bukti asal
Bukti 1Actively addressing genAI, whether implicitly (by designing assessments that focus on human abilities and development) or explicitly (by including genAI in assessment briefs), helps to promote open dialogue about these tools with students and to ensure that assessments reflect programme learning outcomes and disciplinary practices.
Pengajaran
Bukti asal
Bukti 1Programmes are being updated to ensure that students have a mix of GenAI-secure and GenAI-open assessments.
Pengajaran
Bukti asal
Bukti 1However, starting this discussion as an iterative process amidst uncertainty is highly recommended versus ignoring the many shifts that have already occurred.
Ai Tool Treatment
Bukti asal
Bukti 1our staff can choose whether and how to use GenAI, being open and transparent about this. They must operate ethically and in compliance with GDPR.
Penyelidikan
Bukti asal
Bukti 1Senate also approved a specific policy for the use of GenAI in postgraduate research degrees.
Source record
5 sources
durham.ac.uk
durham.ac.uk
dcad-resourcebank.webspace.durham.ac.uk
dcad-resourcebank.webspace.durham.ac.uk
dcad-resourcebank.webspace.durham.ac.uk
Citation: University AI Policy Tracker. "Durham University AI Policy Tracker record." Last checked July 7, 2026. https://eduaipolicy.org/universities/durham-university
Original university source language remains canonical. This tracker is not an official university statement.
Buka log perubahan