University of Witwatersrand

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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