University of Strathclyde

You should be aware that there are risks associated with using any Gen-AI tool, especially those that they are signing up to without the University’s explicit knowledge and support. Guidance on using Gen-AI tools safely and responsibly and some critical questions about using Gen-AI are provided in the additional resources section of this page. You should read this guidance before using any Gen-AI tools in their learning and assessment tasks. Finally, you should note that the recent growth in the availability of (often) free to access Gen-AI tools may not last forever, and that charges for use and the disappearance of tools and services are always possible. This means that any dependency on these tools or services that is built up now could be damaging to your learning and development in the future. Does the use of Gen-AI compromise my academic integrity or mean that I am cheating? Not necessarily, but you should always ensure that you are aware of the expectations of the module or programme leader around the use of Gen-AI and understand what is required of you in any given learning or assessment task. Consult your module handbook and Myplace site for guidance and ask for clarification if you need it. Can Gen-AI help me to learn? Gen-AI tools, used carefully and responsibly, could be helpful in a wide range of learning contexts. Gen-AI tools may help you understand some concepts, or create study materials, summarise complex topics, and so on, but you should always be aware of the fact that Gen-AI tools can be biased, inaccurate and misleading in their outputs. Ensure that you are always thinking critically about information you know has been produced using Gen-AI and fact check anything you intended to rely on. You also need to be sure that you are not undermining the learning process. Follow the guidance that your module or programme leader has provided for you, they will have thought carefully about the learning or assessment task and will know whether the use of Gen-AI is (or isn’t) appropriate in that context. Can I use Gen-AI to help me with writing and creating other content I will submit for an assessment? The work you submit for assessment should always be your own. Depending on the context, the use of Gen-AI may be permitted, but not always, so you should ensure that you know what is allowed. If you are not sure, ask your module or programme leader for guidance. While Gen-AI tools can write and create other content quickly, and sometimes this content is impressive, there can be significant flaws in these outputs, including (among other things) inaccuracies in information, harmful biases, and issues with focus and structure. You should not assume that Gen-AI content is perfect or even good enough or that the act of creating it has helped them to learn. Staff guidance on the use of these tools and services to create content in relation to a particular learning or assessment task should be followed. This guidance reflects the staff members’ experience and expertise in the subject you are studying and has been given to support students’ learning and development. What is meant by thinking critically about Gen-AI output? Gen-AI tools and services are prone to offering responses which contain inaccurate or biased or misleading information. Gen-AI tools can also generate fake references that look genuine and may even contain some correct details such as real author names or journal titles. Always check the original source to verify outputs. Do not simply accept Gen-AI outputs as fact or authority. Make sure that you question assumptions and claims; fact-check key points; seek out diverse perspectives; evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of arguments, and think about how the information has been presented, including the structure and tone of the writing. This critical thinking requires subject or ‘domain’ knowledge which you will be developing through your studies and will help you ensure that you continue to develop a well-rounded understanding of the material you are studying. In short, do not allow any Gen-AI tools or services to think for you or create work which isn’t yours or the result of your efforts. Is it ethical to use Gen-AI? Before using Gen-AI tools or services, there are a number of ethical questions you should consider. Six of the most important questions are outlined in the Essential Questions to Consider document below. The University takes a principled approach to the use of Gen-AI in all Learning and Teaching contexts. These principles can be viewed below in the Principles document. All uses of Gen-AI by students (and staff) should align with these Principles. Ultimately, the question of how ethical it is to use Gen-AI tools and services will depend on a range of contextual factors. In general, however, use of Gen-AI when it undermines important learning and assessment outcomes, when it might be considered unnecessary or frivolous, when it is used to mislead or deceive in any way, not disclosing the use of Gen-AI when this is required, and in any circumstances where the module or programme leader has prohibited its use could be unethical. What are the consequences of unethical Gen-AI use? Unethical use of Gen-AI undermines your learning and could even contribute to the erosion of trust and compromise the quality of the higher education system. Where the misuse of Gen-AI has been identified, the University’s Academic Misconduct Procedure will be followed, which could lead to a range of penalties for any individual who is found to have committed academic misconduct. Ensure that you follow assessment instructions and University policies at all times. Is my data safe and secure when I use Gen-AI tools and services? Gen-AI tools may collect user data. Read privacy policies carefully and avoid sharing Personal, sensitive or copyright protected information. Make sure you are not giving any tools or services access to restricted or copyright protected content including materials provided to you by the University (for example lecture slides, assessment questions or feedback on assessment, library resources or research papers). What are the legal considerations with Gen-AI? Gen-AI models can generate content that may infringe upon existing intellectual property rights, such as copyright. To ensure that you do not do anything unlawful, you should follow the advice and guidance provided to you by your Department and the University. This Generative AI and Copyright libguide provides an overview of copyright and privacy issues. What are the university’s policies on using Gen-AI? The University’s guidelines on academic integrity can be found on the website. You should check this guidance regularly and especially whenever you are completing a new piece of work involving Gen-AI, as it is a rapidly evolving area, and the guidance may have changed since you last checked it. You should also check the rules and guidance for each individual assessment as these may vary. Details will be published in programme and module handbooks and Myplace pages.

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 65–87
SHA-256: 668e337707508c91068e18176f0c9042bab8d50571da8ef2510f630888e2263f

46. The Misconduct Officer should contact the Reported Student with a proposed date and time for the interview at least five working days in advance of the interview date. The student will be notified of/provided with: a. The details of the alleged offence; b. The evidence under consideration, including any witness statements; c. Information relating to penalties which may be imposed if the alleged offence is admitted or found to be proven; d. Their right to be accompanied (or represented in their absence) by a Supporter and/or Representative; e. Their right to submit evidence to the Misconduct Officer in advance of the interview; f. Their right to submit a written statement in response to the alleged offence(s) to the Misconduct Officer in advance of the interview; g. Their right to identify witnesses in support of their case; h. Confirmation that questions investigating authorship will be asked (if relevant); i. Confirmation of the name and job role of any other members of staff who will attend the interview; j. Confirmation of whether any Professional Advisers of the University will attend the interview; k. A link to this Academic Misconduct Procedure.

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 428–447
SHA-256: 46cb042adc8c31ee2f686833485ab8a677ba6a1ee14c53be267028843337ed16

22. Reported Students who consider they have a disability or condition that affects their ability to engage with the disciplinary processes under this Procedure should disclose this to the Misconduct Officer or Senate Office, as appropriate, with relevant evidence provided to allow for an assessment and, where found applicable, for a reasonable adjustment to be made during the handling of the case. Advice and support can be sought from the Disability & Wellbeing Service. 23. A Reported Student who requires language or communication support, for example British Sign Language or spoken language translation, can request this for Stage 1 interviews and Stage 2 Senate Discipline Committee hearings conducted under this Procedure. Requests must be

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 225–233
SHA-256: 46cb042adc8c31ee2f686833485ab8a677ba6a1ee14c53be267028843337ed16

50. Reported Students may submit evidence to the Misconduct Officer, either in advance of the interview or at the interview. Guidance for students on producing evidence for consideration at any stage of this Procedure is available online and should be utilised by Reported Students when they are preparing a submission of evidence 51. The Reported Student may be accompanied to the interview by a Supporter and/or a Representative, (see Table of Roles in Annex 1), of the Reported Student’s choice. As stated in the Table of Roles, the Representative may address the Misconduct Officer on the Reported Student’s behalf if requested to do so by the Reported Student. The Supporter has no formal role in the meeting, although they will be invited to state their name and relationship to the Reported Student. Further information on these roles is set out below: a. Supporters and Representatives are expected to conduct themselves in a polite and respectful manner throughout the proceedings; b. Supporters are not expected to answer questions on behalf of the Reported Student or make statements to the Misconduct Officer. They may ask for clarification on any points discussed during the interview, when invited to do so by the Misconduct Officer; c. Supporters and Representatives are not permitted to ask questions of witnesses, unless

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 468–486
SHA-256: 46cb042adc8c31ee2f686833485ab8a677ba6a1ee14c53be267028843337ed16

The University offers students and staff access to a secure artificial intelligence (AI) chat tool, from the suite of Copilot tools provided as part of its Microsoft licensing agreement. This tool is called Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat (Chat 365). While using AI tools it is essential to use them in an appropriate and ethical way some guidance on the use can be found here and for guidance on Gen AI and Copyright: . Guidance on the use of of Generative AI in Learning, Teaching, and Assessment can be found here Copilot 365 chat vs Copilot 365 Copilot 365 chat Copilot 365 Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat Microsoft Copilot for Microsoft 365 Available to all staff and students Available to individual staff via licence, at additional cost Ask questions or request help across your entire organization’s data—emails, files, chats, and more—in one place Built into apps like Word, Excel, Outlook, and Teams to help you work by creating content, summarizing information, and automating tasks directly within those apps Acts like a central hub for broader questions and insights across your work. Copilot 365 can act as your assistant for specific tasks inside each app. Covered by University’s Enterprise Data Protection agreement Covered by University’s Enterprise Data Protection agreement Security of Protection Unlike other AI tools, Chat 365 is protected by the University’s Enterprise Data Protection agreement with Microsoft (so long as you are logged into your University account when you access it), ensuring safe usage of University data. This means two things. When you ask a question of Chat 365 it asks the Internet and the AI’s internal data. Lt can also use any data or documents you have access to on the University’s Microsoft services (Teams, SharePoint, Outlook etc.), to formulate its response. It also means that the data in Microsoft Chat 365 – about the prompts you use to question it, the responses it generates and any documents that you upload into your prompt will not be available to any unauthorised users. Instead it remains within the University’s Microsoft service. More information is available at: Enterprise data protection in Microsoft 365 Copilot and Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat | Microsoft Learn This does mean that you are safe to use University information in your questions and it will not leave the University. It also means you must take care to ensure the answers are appropriate before using them further, as it may include confidential data that only specific individuals should have access to (you being one of them). You should only use information in your questions (or the documents uploaded with them) that is permitted to be stored on the University’s environment and inline with data policies. If you are using personal data in an AI tool, you should do a DPIA beforehand to ensure that any use of personal data complies with data protection legislation. Similarly if you are using confidential information in an AI tool you should ensure that you understand and assess the risks of uploading such data, and ensure that the data is appropriately managed and secured. How to access Chat 365 Chat 365 can be accessed via: Online by logging into Microsoft Copilot online. Via the Microsoft Copilot App on your mobile device on your mobile device (available for download in your device App store) Through many Microsoft Products automatically – e.g. Edge Browser, Edge – by clicking on the Microsoft Copilot Icon Always ensure you are logged in with your University Account to ensure you are within our Enterprise Data Protection’s environment. Chat 365 . You must not use personal versions of Copilot of University business, as the appropriate contractual clauses and protections will not be in place.

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 60–85
SHA-256: cc183c98e83fb7cc126dc257041459f8d023c00377ffbf438482d0fcf32ad2a0

Additional AI tools for staff While Chat 365 is available to all students and staff, some staff members will soon be able to gain access to enhanced AI capabilities within Microsoft Office. This advanced functionality is referred to as Microsoft 365 Copilot (Copilot 365) you can view the differences here. Both Chat 365 and Copilot 365 utilise the Microsoft Prometheus model, which is built on OpenAI’s GPT-5. These tools offer access to technology similar to GPT-5, while remaining within the University’s Enterprise Data Protection framework with Microsoft, allowing a protected environment in which to handle safe handling of University data . Copilot 365 Licensing Copilot 365 is also covered by the Enterprise Data Protection agreement, these licenses incur an extra cost for the University . About Chat 365 Chat 365 is a secure, AI chat experience included with many Microsoft 365 business subscriptions and is based on ChatGPT. It allows users to interact with a powerful AI model, based on information from the web. You can use it to summarise documents you upload, generate images, or get general information, all with enterprise data protection. About Copilot 365 Copilot 365 is more comprehensive and deeply integrated AI assistant that costs an additional fee per user per month. It includes all the features of Chat 365 but improves the benefits by connecting to the organisation. This means it can access and process your University emails, meetings, chats, and documents stored in SharePoint, OneDrive, and Teams. This integration is the key difference, enabling Copilot 365 to perform highly specific and personalised tasks, such as summarising meetings, drafting a business proposal based on a specific set of documents, or analysing data within Excel. Essentially Chat 365 is a tool for general AI assistance whereas Copilot 365 more of a co-worker, working directly within your Microsoft 365 apps and leveraging your data to help you be more productive. We will be introducing a process to request this additional licences through the faculties at £20 per person per month (subject to change). Accessing Copilot 365 Departments can request a license for Copilot 365 at an additional cost (see below – How to request Copilot 365). This tool is also covered by the University’s Enterprise Data Protection agreement, meaning that University data is held in a secure environment. Copilot 365 can be accessed via: Online by logging into Microsoft Copilot online. Via the Microsoft Copilot App on your mobile device (available for download in your device App store) Through many Microsoft Products automatically – e.g. Edge Browser, Edge – by clicking on the Microsoft Copilot Icon No matter how you access Copilot 365 you must always ensure you are logged in with your University Account! This will ensure that you are within our Enterprise Data Protection’s environment. You must not use any personal versions of Copilot for University business, as otherwise the appropriate contractual clauses and protections will not be in place. Use of personal versions will put University information at risk and could result in a data breach. More information on the use of Copilot can be found at the Copilot learning hub Comparing the two tools Microsoft provides a comparison of Chat 365 and Copilot 365 on its Learn platform. How to request access to Copilot 365 From the beginning of August 2026 there will be a charge of £20 per person per month using Copilot 365.

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 87–109
SHA-256: cc183c98e83fb7cc126dc257041459f8d023c00377ffbf438482d0fcf32ad2a0

54. In reaching their conclusion, the Misconduct Officer may decide to dismiss the allegation on the grounds that it has not been possible to establish, on the balance of probabilities, that the Academic Misconduct occurred. Such a finding will be reached in the following circumstances: a. A lack of demonstrable evidence that proves, on the balance of probabilities, that the alleged Academic Misconduct took place as reported; b. Parties involved have offered conflicting versions of events and are found by the Misconduct Officer to be reliable witnesses, making it impossible to arrive at a conclusion. 55. If the Misconduct Officer upholds the allegation of Academic Misconduct on the grounds that either the evidence obtained demonstrates that it is likely that Academic Misconduct has occurred, and/or the Reported Student admits responsibility for the Academic Misconduct they are accused of, they will impose one or more of the following penalties: a. Any of the recommendations set out in paragraphs 35 above, for Early Intervention/Caution; b. Reported Student issued with a written warning, setting out terms for the student’s continued registration at the University of Strathclyde and timelines within which any specific actions must be taken; c. A reduction of the mark assigned to the assessment/s in question is applied, up to and including awarding a zero with no right to resubmit; d. A reduction of the mark assigned to the assessment/s in question is applied, up to and including a zero with the right to resubmit, either as a first or second attempt; 56. A Misconduct Officer may also refer a case for consideration under Stage 2 of the Procedure. Referral to Stage 2 will normally occur in instances where there is a repeated offence, with previous offence(s) having been formally investigated under Stage 1. Referral to Stage 2 will also be required where the penalty that the Misconduct Officer determines should be imposed has/could have an impact on a student’s final outcome or opportunity to progress as planned in their studies. Misconduct Officers are empowered by Senate to use their judgement to determine whether a case should be referred to Stage 2.

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 510–541
SHA-256: 46cb042adc8c31ee2f686833485ab8a677ba6a1ee14c53be267028843337ed16

RIGHT TO APPEAL 78. Following a Reported Student’s receipt of confirmation that an Academic Misconduct case has been upheld and details of any penalty being applied, either from the Misconduct Officer (for Stage 1) or a Senate Discipline Committee (for Stage 2), the Reported Student may decide to appeal the decision. 79. A decision made by a Misconduct Officer to refer a case to the University Secretary for consideration under Stage 2 of the Procedure does not constitute a penalty, and at this stage a Reported Student is unable to appeal. If the University Secretary considers that a case should not progress to a Senate Discipline Committee hearing the case will be returned to the relevant Department for disposal under Stage 1 of the Procedure and the application of an appropriate penalty. At this stage the Misconduct Officer will write to the Reported Student to inform them of the outcome of the Stage 1 disciplinary process and their right to appeal. 80. As stated in paragraph 39, if a Reported Student does not accept recommendations put in place as part of Early Intervention/Caution, their case will automatically progress to Stage 1. 81. A Reported Student wishing to submit an appeal against the outcome of a Stage 1 case must do so within 10 working days of receipt of written confirmation of the outcome of the case from the Misconduct Officer. 82. A Reported Student wishing to submit an appeal against an outcome of a Stage 2 case must submit this within 10 working days of receipt of written confirmation from the University Secretary of the outcome of the case from a Senate Discipline Committee.

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 738–761
SHA-256: 46cb042adc8c31ee2f686833485ab8a677ba6a1ee14c53be267028843337ed16

Appeals Against Stage 1 Outcomes 85. Appeals against Stage 1 outcomes will be submitted to the Executive Dean of the Faculty (or nominee). The Reported Student must complete the Discipline Procedure Appeals Form and clearly set out the above criteria for appeal, confirming which of the above categories in paragraph 83 form the basis of the appeal. Any supporting evidence must be submitted to the Executive Dean of Faculty, along with the Discipline Procedure Appeals Form.

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 784–789
SHA-256: 46cb042adc8c31ee2f686833485ab8a677ba6a1ee14c53be267028843337ed16

Appeals Against Stage 2 Outcomes 89. Appeals against Stage 2 Senate Discipline Committee outcomes will be submitted to the Senate Office, using the Discipline Procedure Appeals Form. The Reported Student must clearly set out the criteria for appeal (see paragraph 83 above), and will need to provide new evidence to demonstrate sufficient grounds for appeal against these criteria. It is unlikely that an appeal will be heard if the relevant and new evidence and/or a compelling commentary is not provided to demonstrate there are sufficient grounds for appeal. 90. Any evidence submitted to support an appeal must be submitted to the Senate Office along with the Discipline Procedure Appeals Form. Guidance for students on producing evidence for consideration at any stage of this Procedure is available online and should be utilised by

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 806–816
SHA-256: 46cb042adc8c31ee2f686833485ab8a677ba6a1ee14c53be267028843337ed16

12. The University reserves the right to put a student’s academic work through similarity checking software, such as Turnitin, as part of a misconduct investigation process. The University does not endorse or permit the use of any Artificial Intelligence detection tools or services to determine if the unauthorised use of Generative AI has taken place, and does not permit the submission of students' work to these tools or services.

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 162–166
SHA-256: 46cb042adc8c31ee2f686833485ab8a677ba6a1ee14c53be267028843337ed16