Znaczenie tej aktualizacji
Uporządkowany przegląd wpisu
Liczba objętych wpisów: 26 (Poprawiono / zmieniono: 12 · Dodano: 14)
Zasady używania narzędzi AI · Nauczanie · Pozostałe tematy: 4
Ta wersja nie ma jeszcze niezależnie sprawdzonego podsumowania.
To podsumowanie historyczne nie potwierdza bieżących uprawnień ani nowych zasad uczelni.
Uczciwość akademicka · Liczba objętych wpisów: 9 (Poprawiono / zmieniono: 2 · Dodano: 7)
Uzupełnienie rejestru
Dodano
+The SAP decision is Monash’s final internal decision; Student Complaints Policy or University Student Ombudsman Policy cannot dispute that discipline outcome. External review avenues include the Victorian or National Student Ombudsman. Under§7.6.2, Malaysia students may appeal in writing to the Malaysian Registrar General of Private Higher Educational Institutions within14days of RECEIPT of the SAP decision. This external deadline is distinct from the internal20workingday notice-date deadline.
Uzupełnienie rejestru
Dodano
+Monash internal appeals must meet the grounds in§5.2 (bias subject to the prior-objection limitation, potentially material procedural unfairness, excessive penalty, materially relevant new evidence not reasonably available, or an unreasonable decision on the evidence). Under§5.3, written grounds go to the University Registrar within20workingdays from the notice date, subject to extraordinary circumstances. Admitted misconduct permits appeal of penalty only.
Uzupełnienie rejestru
Dodano
+Under§5.5, Responsible Officer or SMP suspension/exclusion should not be enforced until the appeal is determined or its filing period expires, unless extenuating circumstances relate to wellbeing or community welfare. This is not a universal stay of all penalties.
Uzupełnienie rejestru
Dodano
+When artificial intelligence is permitted in an assessment task and a student completes the task without using AI tools, university guidelines require the student to explicitly submit an acknowledgment of non-use.
Uzupełnienie rejestru
Dodano
+No commercial AI detection tools have been approved by eSolutions or the University Data Protection and Privacy Office, and AI detectors absolutely cannot be used as evidence for reporting student breaches of assessment conditions. Text-based assignments remain subject to similarity-detection systems (Turnitin/MOSS) under Student Academic Integrity Procedure §2.7, where markers must apply academic judgement rather than relying on raw scores.
Uzupełnienie rejestru
Dodano
+Under Student Academic Integrity Procedure V4.1 §4.6, unless otherwise stated in the LMS, students can have another person or entity proofread their work limited strictly to identifying errors and suggesting spelling/grammar corrections, but not rewriting text, changing words, reformatting, adding material, or checking calculations/formulas. Specific assessment prohibitions in Moodle override this default proofreading permission.
Uzupełnienie rejestru
Dodano
+Under Student Academic Integrity Procedure, minor, trivial or frivolous breaches due to inappropriate academic practice receive the educative response in §6.1: the Chief Examiner/RO/nominee provides support and a written warning outcome, and awards a mark reflecting the practice without imposing a penalty (§6.1.1). For alleged misconduct, where evidence was not provided with the notice of allegation, students must have a reasonable opportunity of not less than five working days to respond to the allegation and evidence before RO determination (§8.3). Invited students may bring a support person who cannot represent or advocate; at Monash Malaysia a staff member or student may represent them (§8.4). Under §11.1, a finding and penalty, or penalty alone, may be appealed; students who admitted the misconduct may appeal only the penalty. The Hearing and Appeals Panels Procedure governs that process. At Malaysia, §11.2 separately permits a written appeal to the Malaysian Registrar General within 14 days of receiving the decision. Where an academic misconduct allegation occurs WITH a research misconduct allegation, §7.6 instead refers the matter to the research-misconduct RO and this coursework procedure does not investigate or determine it.
Korekta serwisu
Zmiany tekstu wniosków serwisu
−Poprzedni tekstWhen allowed or required to use AI in an assessment, students must follow all instructions and restrictions on its use, clearly document the type of AI used and how it contributed, and provide written acknowledgment of the use of AI and its extent.
+Nowy tekstWhenever AI is allowed or required in an assessment, students must follow task instructions/restrictions, document the type of AI and its contribution, and provide written acknowledgement of use and extent. When necessary, cite and reference using the closest source types in the required style.
Korekta serwisu
Zmiany tekstu wniosków serwisu
−Poprzedni tekstUsing AI in a way not permitted in an assessment, or failing to acknowledge its use correctly, may breach assessment conditions under the Student Academic Integrity Procedure.
+Nowy tekstUsing AI in a way not permitted in an assessment or failing to acknowledge its use correctly breaches assessment conditions under Student Academic Integrity Procedure V4.1 §4.7.
Nauczanie · Liczba objętych wpisów: 6 (Poprawiono / zmieniono: 2 · Dodano: 4)
Uzupełnienie rejestru
Dodano
+No AI detection tools have been approved by eSolutions or the University Data Protection and Privacy Office, and AI detectors absolutely cannot be used as evidence for reporting a student for suspected breach of assessment conditions. Staff marking assessments must submit text work through similarity-detection systems (Turnitin/MOSS) under Student Academic Integrity Procedure §2.7 and must apply academic judgement rather than relying on raw scores.
Uzupełnienie rejestru
Dodano
+Under Assessment Regime Procedure V12 §1.7–1.7.2, Chief Examiners must determine where and how generative AI can be used in a unit, an assessment task, or part of a task; all specifications must be published in the LMS before the teaching period or at least 4 weeks before assessment task details are made available to students (while Table 2 specifies a 4-week deadline before the assessment due date or timetable release), and educational reasoning must be stated when AI is disallowed.
Uzupełnienie rejestru
Dodano
+Monash assessment tasks on Moodle must display one of four standard AI statements: (1) Without Any Limits (AI permitted broadly, with mandatory declaration, verification, and ownership); (2) Guided (AI permitted strictly as specified in assessment instructions); (3) Must Not Be Used (AI prohibited across brainstorming, drafting, coding, and proofreading); or (4) Not Applicable (non-assessed learning activities exempt from formal declarations).
Uzupełnienie rejestru
Dodano
+Students sitting scheduled electronic examinations (eExams) must not use generative AI to generate content or materials unless specifically permitted by the Chief Examiner and displayed on the eExam landing page. In closed book and open book (not open access) assessments, online spell check, grammar, and translation tools are strictly prohibited.
Korekta serwisu
Zmiany tekstu wniosków serwisu
−Poprzedni tekstChief Examiners have overarching responsibility for designing and setting assessment conditions, including communicating and verifying the responsible use of AI within assessment tasks.
+Nowy tekstUnder Assessment Regime Procedure V12 §1.7–1.7.2 and Table 2, Chief Examiners must determine where and how generative AI can be used in a unit or assessment task, clearly publish use specifications in the required LMS section before the teaching period or at least 4 weeks before task details are released (with Table 2 noting a 4-week deadline before the due date / timetable release), and provide educational reasoning when AI is disallowed.
Korekta serwisu
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Poprzedni tekstResponsible use of AI should be explainable in terms of what AI was used, which AI tools assisted in producing the work, how many versions and drafts were produced, and how outputs were adapted.
Nowy tekstResponsible use of AI should be explainable in terms of what AI was used, which AI tools assisted in producing the work, how many versions and drafts were produced, and how outputs were adapted.
Prywatność · Liczba objętych wpisów: 2 (Poprawiono / zmieniono: 2)
Korekta serwisu
Zmiany tekstu wniosków serwisu
−Poprzedni tekstMonash enterprise systems such as Copilot have enterprise data protections identified under the green shield in Monash Copilot. Students should use their Monash email address to access Microsoft Copilot which provides data protection for Monash.
+Nowy tekstStudents should use their Monash email address to access Microsoft Copilot (with commercial data protection under the green shield) or Google Gemini to ensure enterprise data protections apply; user prompts are protected and not used to train foundational AI models, but users must avoid uploading personal, sensitive, copyrighted, or confidential data.
Korekta serwisu
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Poprzedni tekstStudents should not upload personal, sensitive, copyrighted, or licensed material to AI tools, as many AI tools cannot guarantee privacy, strong data security, or the protection of intellectual property.
Nowy tekstStudents should not upload personal, sensitive, copyrighted, or licensed material to AI tools, as many AI tools cannot guarantee privacy, strong data security, or the protection of intellectual property.
Przegląd bezpieczeństwa · Liczba objętych wpisów: 1 (Dodano: 1)
Uzupełnienie rejestru
Dodano
+Under Artificial Intelligence Operations Procedure §1.3–1.3.1, using AI to assist in making a decision that could affect an individual's rights or interests (including student recruitment, admissions, assessment marking, and feedback) is permitted only where the decision is reviewed and finalised by an accountable Monash staff member, and can only be supported by Monash-procured AI systems.
Badania · Liczba objętych wpisów: 2 (Poprawiono / zmieniono: 1 · Dodano: 1)
Uzupełnienie rejestru
Dodano
+Higher Degree by Research (HDR) students should discuss with, and seek guidance from, their supervisors on any intended use of Generative AI and how to best acknowledge and cite its use in their work. Students are asked about Generative AI use in their research at each progress management review milestone and must confirm that use is consistent with Monash policies and guidance with due acknowledgement. Generative AI disclosure questions are included on the online thesis submission form, and thesis preliminary pages prompt candidates and supervisors to acknowledge Generative AI use.
Korekta serwisu
Zmiany tekstu wniosków serwisu
−Poprzedni tekstThesis examiners are not permitted to use Generative AI technologies (such as ChatGPT) during the thesis examination process to support, prepare, or write their examiners' report.
+Nowy tekstTo preserve the confidentiality of thesis examination, thesis examiners are not permitted to use Generative AI technologies (such as ChatGPT) during the thesis examination process to support, prepare, or write their examiners' report.
Zasady używania narzędzi AI · Liczba objętych wpisów: 6 (Poprawiono / zmieniono: 5 · Dodano: 1)
Korekta serwisu
Zmiany tekstu wniosków serwisu
−Poprzedni tekstGoogle Gemini is listed for Monash University in an official university AI tools source. Derived availability: conditionally allowed. Derived endorsement type: officially endorsed.
+Nowy tekstGoogle Gemini is available to Monash staff and students aged 18 and over via an institutional opt-in portal (aioptin.monash.edu) in the Google Education environment; access does not confer blanket assessment permission.
Korekta serwisu
Zmiany tekstu wniosków serwisu
−Poprzedni tekstMicrosoft Copilot is listed for Monash University in an official university AI tools source. Derived availability: allowed. Derived endorsement type: officially endorsed.
+Nowy tekstMicrosoft Copilot is officially supported for all Monash students and staff with enterprise data protection; permissible coursework usage is determined strictly by assessment-specific Moodle instructions.
Korekta serwisu
Zmiany tekstu wniosków serwisu
−Poprzedni tekstNotebookLM is listed for Monash University in an official university AI tools source. Derived availability: conditionally allowed. Derived endorsement type: officially endorsed.
+Nowy tekstNotebookLM (Gemini Notebook) is available to Monash students (18+) and staff through the Google Education environment via opt-in; it operates as a source-grounded assistant for user-provided materials and remains subject to assessment task rules.
Uzupełnienie rejestru
Dodano
+Monash provides institutional access to Microsoft Copilot (with enterprise data protections upon logging in with Monash credentials) and opt-in access to Google Gemini and NotebookLM for students aged 18 and over via eSolutions. The university tool directory also references Zoom AI Companion among approved enterprise tools. However, institutional tool provision does not establish student assessment permission, which remains subject to Chief Examiner instructions in Moodle; specific student eligibility or restriction for other enterprise services is not established in the reviewed student policies.
Korekta serwisu
Zmiany tekstu wniosków serwisu
−Poprzedni tekstMonash's AI responsible use principles include community benefit, education and research excellence, fairness, transparency, integrity and accountability, and data security and privacy.
+Nowy tekstMonash's AI responsible use principles establish five institutional pillars: community benefit, education and research excellence; fairness; transparency; integrity and accountability; and data security and privacy.
Korekta serwisu
Zmiany tekstu wniosków serwisu
−Poprzedni tekstMicrosoft Copilot is a generative AI program that has capabilities to generate text and images in response to user prompts. Monash recommends logging in using Monash credentials to ensure data is more protected.
+Nowy tekstMicrosoft Copilot is available to Monash students and staff; logging in with Monash credentials provides enterprise commercial data protection where user data is not used to train AI models.
Oficjalne źródła · Kontrola źródła
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.
Kontrola źródła
Brak porównywalnych tekstów obu wersji.