Middlesex University

RAG Generative AI Assessment rules Appropriate use of AI in your assessments The Red Amber Green (RAG) table below defines the different levels of scope you may be given to use GenAI in your assessed work. Your Assessment Brief which can be found in your Module Handbook defines which level applies to the specific assessment task and will include further guidance and support. When can I use AI for my assessments? Generative AI Scope in Assessment What it means RED – No scope GenAI is not permitted in the development or creation of outputs (except assistive technology via reasonable adjustment). Assessments in this category can include exams, Vivas/interviews, and professional / regulatory competencies where GenAI is out of scope. AMBER – Assistive Scope Assistive use is permitted only within defined parameters for assessment preparation and process, such as summarising sources, connecting ideas/themes, self-test and revision prompts, spelling and grammar support in drafts, support for data analysis, project planning and management. GenAI should not be used to produce entire sections of text or elements of media that appear in the final submission. GREEN – Integrated Scope Integrated use: GenAI can be used to create content that appears in the final submission. GenAI can be used at multiple stages of the assessment process. GenAI use must be acknowledged and/or cited, and assessments may ask for student commentary and critical evaluation of its use. Recording and Acknowledging use of Generative AI for Assessments How do I record and acknowledge use of GenAI? The table below is available in your Module Handbook. Use it to record how you have used GenAI for your assessment. It will help you keep track of the tools and prompts you used, reflect on your learning, and explain your study choices if needed - for example in tutorials, group work, reflections, or reflective and methodological sections of your work. Acknowledge or Reference AI? Always consult with your module tutor before using AI for your studies or an assignment. It is crucial that you only use AI for your studies or an assignment where, your tutor has advised regarding whether and how AI should be used for their module. Check your Module handbook for the RAG (red, amber, green) AI status for your assignment. - see the table to the left. Using AI to support your learning can be beneficial if used responsibly and with integrity. However, submitting work generated by AI as your own work is a breach of academic integrity. You should always be using AI as a study support not as a creative information generator. Therefore you should not need to reference AI as an information source. Anything that is not your own original creation or thoughts should always be appropriately referenced, AI related or not. You will need to declare any use of generative AI output in your work and should provide a full and correctly formatted in-text citation and reference list entry. If the AI’s output (for example, a ChatGPT response) is only available to you, please cite and reference this as a Generative AI Personal Communication, as shown in the guides provided on this referencing page. Please consult with your tutor in case they also require you to provide a copy of the AI output as an appendix to your work. Please also use Cite Them Right Online for further information (including alternative referencing formats).

Verzameld: 2026-10-08 · 25–49
SHA-256: bf3db4630f7657d75cfdfcb642adf4b7973512031b923c2005933720e2eb8854

h) Academic misconduct is a breach of the values of academic integrity, and can occur when a student cheats in an assessment, or attempts to deliberately mislead an examiner that the work presented is their own when it is not. It includes, but is not limited to, plagiarism, commissioning or buying work from a third party or copying the work of others, unauthorized and/or unacknowledged use of artificial intelligence in a piece of work submitted for grading. i) If a third party or anonymous whistleblower reports that there has been academic misconduct by a student of the University, the University may decide to investigate the allegations. j) The University deals with breaches of academic integrity through instances of academic misconduct. It will take action against any student who contravenes these regulations through negligence, foolishness or deliberate intent in any form of assessment. k) This procedure is concerned with the actions of students and not their intentions. An excuse of “not intending to” is not an acceptable defence. l) Where students are registered on awards which lead to professional registration and there is Fitness to Practise requirements, a major offence may be referred to an appropriate Fitness to Practice Committee for consideration. m) In all cases of alleged academic misconduct and cheating, students will be treated as innocent until a case against them has been investigated and upheld. n) A finding that academic misconduct has occurred is a judgement based on available evidence, the standard of proof being the balance of probability. o) These Regulations should be read in conjunction with the Policy and Procedures for Academic Integrity and Misconduct.

Verzameld: 2026-10-08 · 4187–4209
SHA-256: 6b7035880529aa81f36a90aa7f8bba87597fe811ec5fdaa4e444d9af346ef1df

AI Hub Guidelines Students must follow the ethical use of AI implemented by MDX Dubai and as discussed by their lecturers on their program level. Students have free access to premium AI tools (ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity) through the AI Hub. Students should use the AI Hub computers for academic or research purposes only. Students may use the AI Hub computers for up to 30 minutes per session. AI Hub computers do not save any research done by students. Students are responsible for saving their search results or sending them to their cloud storage / emails before the session ends. Students are responsible for deleting files temporarily saved in the AI Hub computers and the chats/conversations with the AI accounts that they access. Students should be cautious of confidential or unpublished information shared in chats/conversations with the AI tools. Students must adhere to copyright laws for uploading published works in any AI tools.

Verzameld: 2026-10-08 · 39–47
SHA-256: 28e5feb2fadd5f1f9331383d26d6710dfc40991a91a3a05f5f93c7255ce6c0ac

How long does an appeal take to resolve? In normal circumstances, we aim to complete the whole process within 90 calendar days of receipt of your full appeal. There will occasionally be circumstances when, for good reason, the University will need to extend the timeframe. If this happens, you will be notified by email.

Verzameld: 2026-10-08 · 216–218
SHA-256: 8e08cd46f08295934b15b9faac011076a1128c234e2fc16ebf547af9cee20ec4

Reason 3: Student academic misconduct “Grounds listed in the Academic Integrity and Misconduct regulations Section F4, following a penalty imposed for academic misconduct.” In fairness to other students, penalties are normally greater than what would follow if you had merely failed the assessment. Penalties will normally affect the grade for the whole module and not just the piece of work in question. If you have received a penalty following an investigation of your work for academic misconduct (for example, plagiarism in coursework, cheating in an examination, etc) you can appeal if: There is new and relevant evidence that you were demonstrably and for the most exceptional reasons unable to present to the Secretary to Academic Board or Academic Misconduct Officer or to the Panel of Investigation meeting during the Academic Misconduct investigation You must be able to present a case to show why it would have been unreasonable for the University to expect you to disclose the evidence at an earlier stage, ie, when you had the opportunity to respond to the allegation of academic misconduct or, if the circumstances were known to you, why you chose not to disclose them at the time. And/or That the Academic Integrity and Misconduct procedures were not complied with in such a way that it might cause reasonable doubt as to whether the result would have been different had they been complied with You must indicate which procedures were not followed and why you think that the decision would have been different if they had been followed. And/or That there is documented evidence of prejudice or bias on the part of the Secretary to Academic Board or by one or more members of the Panel of Investigation And/or That the penalty imposed exceeds the maximum penalties listed in the regulations There is no need to discuss your case with members of staff before submitting your appeal. You should submit your appeal within 10 working days of the date of the written outcome to your misconduct case.

Verzameld: 2026-10-08 · 140–153
SHA-256: 8e08cd46f08295934b15b9faac011076a1128c234e2fc16ebf547af9cee20ec4

G2.3 Except where (a) applies, there is a time limit of 28 calendar days from the date of the Programme Assessment Board results being published for submission of a formal appeal to the Secretary to Academic Board. a) If an appeal arises following due process of the Informal Apprenticeship Appeal procedure, Academic Misconduct procedure or Student Complaints and Grievance procedure, the time limit is 10 working days from the date the student receives the written result of this procedure. Regulations G2.1 & G2.2 shall not apply. G3 How to make a formal appeal G3.1 Complete the appeal form from MyMDX. G3.2 Submit the completed form, including the statement and evidence, by email to the Appeals Officer within the time limit specified in G2.3. If it is received later than this, it is likely to be rejected unless a statement is attached of the circumstances which prevented the deadline from being met, and this is accepted as valid by the Secretary to Academic Board.

Verzameld: 2026-10-08 · 4369–4385
SHA-256: 6b7035880529aa81f36a90aa7f8bba87597fe811ec5fdaa4e444d9af346ef1df

What is a Review? Within 10 working days of receiving the decision that your appeal is Not Justified, you can request a Review if: You have new and relevant evidence which you can show that, for exceptional reasons, you were unable to present during the appeal process You have evidence to show that the appeal regulations and procedures were not complied with in such a way that materially affected the decision This is not a reopening of your original appeal Dissatisfaction with the outcome of your appeal is not alone a valid reason for requesting a Review. The Reviewer will be a senior member of University staff who is neutral to you and has not previously been involved with the appeal case.

Verzameld: 2026-10-08 · 252–258
SHA-256: 8e08cd46f08295934b15b9faac011076a1128c234e2fc16ebf547af9cee20ec4

G11 How to request a Review of appeal G11.1 Advice on obtaining a Review form is given in the Academic Appeal Letter of Outcome. G11.2 Send the form, including the statement and any relevant evidence, by email to the address on the form within 10 working days of the date of the Academic Appeal Letter of Outcome. If it is received later than this, it is likely to be rejected unless a statement is attached of the circumstances which prevented the deadline from being met, and this is accepted as valid by the Reviewer.

Verzameld: 2026-10-08 · 4680–4688
SHA-256: 6b7035880529aa81f36a90aa7f8bba87597fe811ec5fdaa4e444d9af346ef1df

Who can I contact for advice on the progress of my appeal? Members of the Faculties/School’s staff are unable to discuss your appeal with you while it is being processed, but if you would like information on its progress, please contact the Appeals Team. If you would like advice about your status or progress as a student while your appeal is being considered, please contact UniHelp or the Student Union. What is an informal settlement? If the people considering your case decide that there are grounds for appeal, the Chair of the Assessment Board may be invited to request the Board to review its decision in the light of the information in your appeal case file. If the Chair agrees that this is appropriate action you would be notified by email of this outcome to your appeal. The Board is obliged to take full consideration of your case and will either change its original decision in your favour or decide that no change is made to the original decision. If the Board agrees a change is to be made, this is called an Informal Settlement as it did not require an Appeal Panel to consider the case. An Appeal Panel will only be held if an Informal Settlement could not be reached. What is an Appeal Panel? Following the decision that you do have grounds for appeal, an Appeal Panel is held only if an Informal Settlement cannot be reached. The Panel is called to clarify evidence by questioning those who have submitted it, including yourself, enabling the Appeal Panel to reach a just decision. If a Panel is to be called, you will be invited to attend and will be sent all the relevant information. The Panel normally consists of three senior members of staff from as many Schools as practical and one Student Union representative. No-one is eligible to be a Panel member who has taught you or is likely to teach or assess you. You can be accompanied by a companion, bring and question witnesses, and comment on the evidence. If the Appeal Panel finds that an injustice appears to have been caused to you, it will submit all its findings for the Assessment Board's consideration and require the Board to review its decision. The Board is obliged to take full consideration of your case and would either change its original decision in your favour or decide that no change is made to the original decision.

Verzameld: 2026-10-08 · 229–244
SHA-256: 8e08cd46f08295934b15b9faac011076a1128c234e2fc16ebf547af9cee20ec4

If your appeal is against a penalty for academic misconduct: No members of staff who were the decision-makers in your academic misconduct case will be involved with your appeal If you are presenting evidence of extenuating circumstances which you did not submit with your response to the allegation of academic misconduct, the reason you give for not submitting this evidence at the appropriate time will be considered first. If the reason is considered valid, the appeal process will continue. If it is considered not to be valid, you will be notified that the appeal has been rejected. If the appeal is accepted, they will make a recommendation to the Senior Manager of the University on whether the appeal is formally investigated

Verzameld: 2026-10-08 · 205–208
SHA-256: 8e08cd46f08295934b15b9faac011076a1128c234e2fc16ebf547af9cee20ec4