Johannesburg, South Africa

University of Witwatersrand

Student guide · Task rules and procedure

Follow the June 2026 policy and faculty AI guidance.

The formal Wits AI Policy took effect on 4 June 2026. Follow faculty/task rules and disclose AI; public-AI privacy and equitable alternatives have stated conditions. Science Copilot guidance is faculty-scoped. The older framework claim and 2022 misconduct procedure retain their dates and separate routes.

Panduan dasar di bawah adalah dalam bahasa Inggeris; bukti rasmi dikekalkan dalam bahasa asal.

Ringkasan lengkap peraturan pelajar belum tersedia; rujuk pernyataan dan sumber yang dikumpulkan.

Skop dan peralihan

The formal Wits AI Policy took effect on 4 June 2026. Follow faculty/task rules and disclose AI; public-AI privacy and equitable alternatives have stated conditions. Science Copilot guidance is faculty-scoped. The older framework claim and 2022 misconduct procedure retain their dates and separate routes.

Semakan sumber dan bukti bertarikh

CHECK FACULTY AI GUIDANCE. June 2026 institutional AI policy requires following faculty guidance; not every task permits AI.
Semak peraturan fakulti dan tugasan anda.

Apakah yang berlaku jika penggunaan AI menimbulkan kebimbangan?

Tambahan dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · Pemakaian semasa belum disahkan secara bebas

Bandingkan rekod universiti yang diterbitkan ↗

Ringkasan kini tersedia dalam bahasa Inggeris

Apabila kebimbangan timbul

Peruntukan berkaitan AIProsedur rasmiModality: Maklumat

Tafsiran laman

Wits asks staff and students to follow faculty ethical-AI guidance and related assessment, plagiarism and integrity rules. An understanding of the principles should be declared in formal assessment submissions using the Appendix template. Check the actual faculty/task conditions; this institutional policy is not blanket assessment permission.

Skop: students · Scope is limited to the cited official source and stated conditions; this is a local candidate, not a complete university rule set.

Lihat teks asal dan syarat

Skop: students · university

An acknowledgement of an understanding of the above principles as they relate to the productive and fair use of AI for all academic work should be declared in all formal submissions for assessment at the University through the comprehensive template provided as in appendix 1 attached hereto. 5. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES It is the responsibility of all staff and students to: • Uphold the principles of AI use as per this policy • Follow the guidelines of ethical AI use in assessments and research as specified by the Faculties • Adhere to this policy as well as related Standing Orders on Assessment, Plagiarism Policy, Academic Integrity Policy and other relevant University policies that guide learning, teaching and research.
Lihat sumber rasmi ↗

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 351–364
SHA-256: 8e758bdf1bf8e4c733b8026108485147f9faf8703e422174341c52ca7995ebde

Peruntukan berkaitan AIProsedur rasmiModality: Maklumat

Tafsiran laman

Individuals remain responsible for originality, accuracy and integrity, and AI use must be transparently disclosed and acknowledged. Research use should be described in dedicated write-up sections for reproducibility; AI cannot be an author. Tool use does not remove responsibility for misconduct.

Skop: students · Scope is limited to the cited official source and stated conditions; this is a local candidate, not a complete university rule set.

Lihat teks asal dan syarat

Skop: students · university

4.2. Uphold Unwavering Academic Integrity and Personal Accountability. The University underscores that the individual scholar (or human team) remains fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, and integrity of their work. The use of AI must be transparently 6 POLICY: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SECRETARIAT REGISTRY disclosed and appropriately acknowledged in line with university policy. The use of a tool does not absolve the user of responsibility for any academic misconduct, including but not limited to plagiarism, falsification, fabrication or improper attribution. In line with good research practice, researchers should commit to describing their use of AI tools transparently to facilitate the reproducibility of their methods and findings in dedicated sections in the final write up of the study as a matter of course (University of Oxford, 2025), remembering that AI cannot be an author on any work. Just as you would cite a book, article, or dataset, acknowledging AI tools respects intellectual property and gives credit to the sources that contributed to your work. Further, when AI is used, it's crucial that the author understands the content and can take responsibility for it. Declaring AI use helps educators and reviewers assess whether the student or researcher truly grasps the material.
Lihat sumber rasmi ↗

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 207–227
SHA-256: 8e758bdf1bf8e4c733b8026108485147f9faf8703e422174341c52ca7995ebde

Cara memberikan respons

Panduan sumberProsedur rasmiModality: Maklumat

Tafsiran laman

Under the published 2022 Student Academic Misconduct Policy, the SAMC confirms whether the student wishes to appear or make representations; its developmental proceedings do not permit legal representation. Records and previous infringements are considered under that policy. This is a general procedure, not an automatic AI verdict.

Skop: students · Published 2022 Student Academic Misconduct Policy; formal 2018 Student Discipline rules remain separate and were not obtained as a current full text.

Lihat teks asal dan syarat

Skop: students · university

8.3. The SAMC considers reported infringements and scrutinises the publication of conventions within the School. 8.4. The SAMC is required to: 8.4.1. Confirm whether the student concerned wishes to appear and/or make representations before the SAMC. Given that the nature of the processes before the SAMC are not intended to be adversarial and/or legalistic in nature, but instead developmental, no legal representation will be permitted for the purpose of those processes. 8.4.2. Note the nature and keep a record of minor infringements, as well as the penalties imposed by academic staff members. The SAMC should identify trends and patterns and bring these to the attention of the Head of School and individual academic staff members as this information may have value to the educational development of students. 8.4.3. Ensure and monitor that accurate records are kept as needed. 8.4.4. Consider the student’s record to ascertain whether there have been previous instances of Academic Misconduct recorded or noted against the student. 8.4.5. Always act within the spirit and principles of this Policy.
Lihat sumber rasmi ↗

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 375–395
SHA-256: 60fbb355f903fd9ab98238c849ea592b06b1b0f5a47a7ec368e7f1348348326f

Semakan dan rayuan

Panduan sumberProsedur rasmiModality: Maklumat

Tafsiran laman

The general non-plagiarism table distinguishes Level 1 minor first cases (academic staff, appeal to SAMC) from Level 2 significant/repeated cases (SAMC, appeal to Faculty Dean). Conditional sanctions include up to 100% of work marks within the DP limit; Level 2 may include up to 15 hours community service or referral to SDC. SAMC/Dean appeal decisions are final on these routes; no numeric appeal deadline is given here.

Skop: students · 2022 general non-plagiarism table only; plagiarism and SDC have separate provisions. No automatic AI sanction.

Lihat teks asal dan syarat

Skop: students · university

Level Description Disciplinary Forum Appeal Forum 1 Minor first-time The relevant academic staff SAMC may: infringements may: - Uphold the decision of the - Impose a penalty of up to academic staff member; 100% of the mark for that work or but not more severe than the - Set aside or amend the loss of Duty Performed (DP). decision of the Such penalty may be limited to academic staff a 100% penalty for a specific member to a lesser question in an assessment; penalty; The decision of the SAMC is final. 2 Significant first-time SAMC may: Faculty Dean may: infringements or repeat - Impose a penalty of up to - Uphold the decision of the infringements. 100% of the mark for that SAMC; work but not more severe - Set aside or amend the than the loss of Duty decision of the SAMC to Performed (DP); AND / OR a lesser penalty; or - Community service of up to 15 - Refer the matter to the SDC. hours, as per the attached The decision of the Dean is Guideline. final. - In matters where the merits and the extent of the conduct so warrant, the SAMC may refer the matter to the SDC.
Lihat sumber rasmi ↗

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 266–293
SHA-256: 60fbb355f903fd9ab98238c849ea592b06b1b0f5a47a7ec368e7f1348348326f

Sokongan dan penyesuaian

Peruntukan berkaitan AIProsedur rasmiModality: Maklumat

Tafsiran laman

The linked Wits AI Policy records Council approval and effect from 4 June 2026. This is newer than the retained May 2026 reviewed claim describing the earlier framework as not a policy document; the old claim remains a dated record, not a description of this new policy.

Skop: students · Scope is limited to the cited official source and stated conditions; this is a local candidate, not a complete university rule set.

Lihat teks asal dan syarat

Skop: students · university

Policy Title AI (Artificial Intelligence) Policy Officer Registrar/ Deputy Vice Chancellor Research & Innovation Date Approved by Council 4 June 2026 Date Effective From 4 June 2026 This Policy is to be read in conjunction with the Wits.POPIA Policy.
Lihat sumber rasmi ↗

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 35–42
SHA-256: 8e758bdf1bf8e4c733b8026108485147f9faf8703e422174341c52ca7995ebde

Peruntukan berkaitan AIProsedur rasmiModality: Maklumat

Tafsiran laman

The policy says sensitive/personal data should not be entered into public AI and requires honest records of how and where meaningful AI helped research or major administrative tasks. Where AI is permitted, equitable alternatives and pathways will be available for access barriers. This does not authorize AI in prohibited tasks.

Skop: students · Scope is limited to the cited official source and stated conditions; this is a local candidate, not a complete university rule set.

Lihat teks asal dan syarat

Skop: students · university

Staff and students engaging with AI must be mindful of the risks relating to data security, confidentiality, privacy, and intellectual property. Sensitive and / or personal data should not be entered into public AI systems, as this may compromise research participants, or intellectual property. Disclosure of confidential data may also destroy novelty or originality, placing intellectual 8 POLICY: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SECRETARIAT REGISTRY property in the public domain. The Protection of Personal Information Act No. 04 of 2013 (POPIA) imposes obligations regarding the collection and processing of personal information, including informed consent, minimal data collection, and lawful, specific purposes. Use of AI with identifiable sensitive and / or personal data, without anonymisation or pseudonymisation, may result in non-compliance with POPIA. Content generated entirely by AI, without meaningful human creative input, will not attract copyright protection. Where AI is used as an assistive tool, the human contributor must exercise genuine creative judgment and skill for copyright to vest which would fall under the Copyright Act No. 98 of 1978 in which protection applies only to original works authored by natural persons. For any research or major administrative task/s where AI has played a meaningful role, it is required that staff and students make an honest declaration by recording how and where AI was used. This “decision provenance” helps ensure transparency and accountability in the process. Examples of such declarations are available in Faculty documents and can be accessed at AI Policies - Wits University 4.6. Equitable, Inclusive and Socially Just AI practices The University is committed to ensuring that the integration of AI into teaching and learning, research, and administration promotes fairness and inclusivity. The implementation of AI must, as far as is reasonably possible, avoid reinforcing or worsening existing social, economic, and / or educational inequalities. The University recognises that unequal access to digital infrastructure, affordable data, and reliable devices may disadvantage some members of our university community. To address this, the University will actively work to mitigate challenges associated with the digital divide, data costs, and accessibility. Where AI is permitted, equitable alternatives and pathways will be made available to students and staff who encounter barriers to access.
Lihat sumber rasmi ↗

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 297–337
SHA-256: 8e758bdf1bf8e4c733b8026108485147f9faf8703e422174341c52ca7995ebde

Peruntukan berkaitan AIPanduan rasmiModality: Maklumat

Tafsiran laman

The Faculty of Science student guide recommends institution-approved Microsoft Copilot through the WITS ICT login and attributes privacy/no-training protection to that service. The passage is Science guidance; individual account access, provider behavior and assessment permission were not independently tested.

Skop: Faculty of Science · Scope is limited to the cited official source and stated conditions; this is a local candidate, not a complete university rule set.

Lihat teks asal dan syarat

Skop: Faculty of Science students · faculty

Use the institution-approved AI tool. Don’t use unapproved or public AI tools where data privacy or security could be a concern. Use Microsoft Copilot (https://copilot.microsoft.com/), accessible with your WITS ICT login. Your data stays private and is not used to train the AI, making the use secure and confidential.
Lihat sumber rasmi ↗

Dikumpulkan: 2026-10-08 · 190–196
SHA-256: 06b85a74c6ae1a6d09af51e3bb385d1a9bc806e496f07a3dd22b74eded3df3fb

Pengumpulan dan versi

Tambahan berasaskan sumber yang diterbitkan. Ringkasan Inggeris dan petikan asal dipisahkan daripada rekod yang disemak. Proses dan hasil bukan hukuman automatik bagi penggunaan AI. Pemakaian semasa belum disahkan secara bebas; semak skop dan versi sumber.

Disemak dengan teks tersimpan; bukan terjemahan rasmi

Hash membolehkan perbandingan teks tersimpan; ia tidak mengesahkan kesahan semasa atau ketidakbolehubahan. Tema ini bukan urutan wajib.

Alat AI dan akses

Akses alat bukan kebenaran menggunakannya dalam penilaian. Semak peraturan tugasan, pengguna yang layak dan sekatan data.

Rekod alat berasaskan sumber belum diwujudkan untuk universiti ini. Ini tidak bermaksud alat tiada atau AI dilarang.

Reviewed record

Pernyataan yang disemak

Pernyataan yang disemak: 4

Integriti akademikPernyataan yang disemak: 1

Academic Integrity

Wits University's AI Framework says individual scholars or human teams remain responsible for originality, accuracy, and integrity, and that AI use should be transparently disclosed and appropriately acknowledged in line with university policy.

Semakan: Disemak oleh ejenKeyakinan94%

Nilai ternormalisasi: responsibility_disclosure_acknowledgement

Bukti asal

Bukti 1
The University underscores that the individual scholar (or human team) remains fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, and integrity of their work. The use of AI must be transparently disclosed and appropriately acknowledged in line with university policy.
PengajaranPernyataan yang disemak: 1

Pengajaran

A Wits CLTD guidelines document describes generative AI guidance for learning, teaching, and research, with an intended audience that includes academic staff, students, researchers, administrators, and policy makers.

Semakan: Disemak oleh ejenKeyakinan86%

Nilai ternormalisasi: cltd_gai_guidelines_learning_teaching_research_audience

Bukti asal

Bukti 1
These guidelines are intended for a broad audience within the higher education community, including: Academic staff; Students; Researchers; Administrators and Policy Makers.
PrivasiPernyataan yang disemak: 1

Privasi

Wits University's AI Framework advises staff and students to be mindful of data security, confidentiality, privacy, and intellectual property risks, and says sensitive or personal data should not be entered into public AI systems.

Semakan: Disemak oleh ejenKeyakinan93%

Nilai ternormalisasi: sensitive_personal_data_public_ai_caution

Bukti asal

Bukti 1
Staff and students engaging with AI must be mindful of the risks relating to data security, confidentiality, privacy, and intellectual property. Sensitive and / or personal data should not be entered into public AI systems.
Status sumberPernyataan yang disemak: 1

Source Status

Wits University publishes an AI Framework page for responsible AI use, and that page states that the framework is not a policy document.

Semakan: Disemak oleh ejenKeyakinan95%

Nilai ternormalisasi: ai_framework_not_policy_document

Bukti asal

Bukti 1
The University has established six broad principles that provide a common framework for the ethical use of AI, ensuring that academic integrity and research ethics are upheld. This framework is not a policy document.

Source record

Sumber rasmi

Sumber: 2

Buka senarai sumber rasmi
Maklumat rekod, JSON dan petikan
SemakSemakan dibantu AIKeyakinan95%Status petikanTidak diterbitkanJSONJSON awam

Citation: University AI Policy Tracker. "University of Witwatersrand AI Policy Tracker record." Last checked May 16, 2026. https://eduaipolicy.org/universities/university-of-witwatersrand

Original university source language remains canonical. This tracker is not an official university statement.

Buka log perubahan

Saved from University AI Policy Tracker. This record summarizes the cited sources; it is not an official university statement or assessment permission. Source and review dates are listed above. Hashes identify retained content, not authorization.