Which universities mention AI in exams or assessments?

UNSW uses a Levels of AI Assistance framework with six categories for assessments: No Assistance, Simple Editing Assistance, Planning or Design Assistance, Assistance with Attribution, Generative AI Software-based Assessments, and Not Applicable.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNSW defines six high-level categories for permitted AI use in assessments: No Assistance, Simple Editing Assistance, Planning/Design Assistance, Assistance with Attribution, Generative AI Software-based Assessments, and Not Applicable.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Under UNSW's 'No Assistance' level, students are not permitted to use any generative AI tools, software, or service to search for or generate information or answers.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ANU approved six institutional AI principles via Academic Board in June 2023, covering excellence/integrity, research engagement, clear guidance, AI literacy, access/privacy/security, and collaborative policy development.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Submitting AI-generated content as one's own work constitutes a breach of ANU's academic integrity rules.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ANU academic staff are not permitted to upload student data or academic work to generative AI platforms.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Auckland's Assessment of Courses Procedures state that AI use in assessment tasks may only be restricted when the task is a controlled assessment, identified as Lane 1; AI may be used without restriction in other assessment tasks, identified as Lane 2.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Auckland's Assessment of Courses Procedures require courses to use the two-lane nomenclature, including telling students which assessments align with Lane 1 or Lane 2, and require courses and programmes to implement the two-lane approach in assessment design by 2027.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Auckland's student AI advice states that AI has no agency, treats the student prompting an AI tool as the author, and says students are ultimately responsible for work submitted for assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UOW's Subject Delivery Policy requires assessment information in each Subject Outline to include a statement indicating whether and how generative artificial intelligence tools can be used in the subject, including for each assessment task.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UOW's Assessment and Feedback Policy says staff are not permitted to upload student work to third-party tools, including GenAI or misconduct detection software, in the context of privacy and data policies.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UOW's Academic Integrity Policy lists misuse of generative artificial intelligence technology as academic misconduct when work is generated by an unauthorised AI tool without subject coordinator permission, or when permitted AI-generated work lacks appropriate acknowledgement.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Students may only use GenAI for assessed work (assignments, exams, projects, theses) if expressly permitted by their instructor, supervisor, or program.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UBC says instructors or teaching assistants cannot require students to use GenAI or any other technology tool that requires sharing personal information unless the tool has undergone a UBC Privacy Impact Assessment review and been approved for use with personal information.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Do not enter personal information into any generative AI tool that has not been through UBC's FIPPA compliance assessment (PIA), as to do so may be a breach of privacy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Sheffield PGR guidance says postgraduate researchers' use of generative AI must align with the University's expectations for responsible research and academic integrity.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Student academic-integrity guidance tells students to check school or department guidance and module assessment criteria before using GenAI, because use may be prohibited on some modules or assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Sheffield says every undergraduate programme integrates GenAI literacy through structured teaching activities and formal assessment, while giving staff and students clarity about acceptable AI use across assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For assessments and assignments, students should assume generative AI use is not permitted unless the assessment or assignment explicitly states otherwise.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University states that generative AI detection tools are not currently allowable and that student work should not be uploaded to generative AI detection software.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The research AI guidance says personal, confidential, or sensitive data must not be entered into AI tools without clear justification, data minimisation, and a Data Protection Impact Assessment where applicable.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Staff setting summative assessment must: declare whether/how students can use AI; review assessment design for alignment with permitted AI use; ensure equality of baseline AI tool provision where authorised; specify declaration forms for student AI use; only identify suspected unauthorised AI use through marking or university-endorsed detection tools (none currently endorsed); and handle misconduct under usual disciplinary regulations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Students undertaking summative assessment must: complete assessment in line with the AI use declaration for each assignment; acknowledge their AI use via a formal declaration in the prescribed format; and understand that submitting work breaching AI specifications constitutes cheating and may constitute plagiarism, handled under usual disciplinary regulations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University's policy on AI use in summative assessment is based on three principles endorsed by Education Committee in Trinity term 2025: (1) educational practice must be grounded in values of integrity, honesty and transparency, which must be clearly articulated and frequently discussed; (2) every discrete unit of assessment must be carefully designed to be fit for its specific purposes, clearly articulated to students; (3) every summative assessment must be accompanied by a clear explanation of what appropriate assistance is permitted and what is forbidden, specifying how students should report assistance received.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

At the University of Melbourne, using GenAI tools to produce work submitted for assessment without acknowledgement constitutes academic misconduct under cl. 4.13 of the Student Academic Integrity Policy (MPF1310).

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Students must check with their Subject Coordinator before using GenAI for assessment-related work at the University of Melbourne.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Melbourne assessment materials and teaching materials constitute University IP and should never be tested on third-party external GenAI platforms such as ChatGPT; any such testing must be done only within the University's secure SparkAI platform.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

From Semester 1 2025, the default position in the University of Sydney Academic Integrity Policy has been reversed: except for supervised examinations and supervised in-semester tests, students may use automated writing tools or generative AI to complete assessments unless expressly prohibited by the unit coordinator.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Sydney's Academic Integrity Policy 2022 states it is an academic integrity breach to inappropriately generate content using artificial intelligence to complete an assessment task, and submitting an assessment generated by AI may be considered contract cheating.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Sydney has adopted a 'two-lane approach' to assessment: Lane 1 comprises secure, in-person supervised assessments to assure learning, and Lane 2 comprises open assessments that support and scaffold the use of all available and relevant tools including generative AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

A student using any unacknowledged content generated by artificial intelligence within a summative assessment as though it is their own work constitutes academic misconduct, unless explicitly stated otherwise in the assessment brief.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Examiners are not permitted to upload, copy, or share student work with Generative AI tools and Large Language Models. Examiners may not use tools such as ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google Bard, or Microsoft Copilot to analyse student work or provide written feedback. Examiners may use these tools to support their own writing in documenting feedback (e.g. consolidating personal notes and rephrasing comments).

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University's standard licensed GenAI tools are Microsoft 365 Copilot, Google Gemini, and Google NotebookLM. Use of other licensed GenAI tools is not prohibited but must be procured in accordance with applicable procurement policy, including completion of risk assessments such as DPIAs and/or ISRAs. The public, free versions of Copilot, Gemini and NotebookLM must not be used for University activities.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Nottingham Quality Manual includes unpermitted generative-AI-generated or AI-improved assessment work within false authorship.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Nottingham student guidance says AI use for assessed work is assessment-specific: module or assessment information should say whether AI use is essential, optional, or prohibited, and students should not assume permission.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For study support outside assessments, University of Nottingham guidance recommends Microsoft Copilot with a Nottingham login and says logged-in Copilot will not record prompts, inputs, or uploads as training data.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Uppsala University's central guidelines say sensitive personal data may only be transferred to a university-approved generative AI system, and student material may not be transferred without the student's permission to a generative AI system that might use it to train the system.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Uppsala University's central generative AI guidelines say that any restriction on generative AI use in teaching or assessment, and any requirement to report AI use, must be clearly stated in written information; restrictions must be justifiable by learning outcomes, the nature of the task, or pedagogical considerations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

When students are expected to use generative AI in teaching or assessment, Uppsala University's central guidelines say the course coordinator or examiner must be able to ensure the tools are provided at no cost to the student; if doctoral students are expected to use generative AI, the principal supervisor has responsibility for ensuring suitable tools are available at no cost.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Columbia Law School prohibits generative AI use in exams, final papers, and for drafting any part of work submitted for credit, even if fully documented.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Columbia University has a university-wide Generative AI Policy from the Office of the Provost governing use by staff, faculty, students, and researchers, covering information security, data privacy, copyright, academic integrity, and bias.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

CUIMC requires a formal IT Risk Assessment review before deploying any locally installed AI models (LLM, NLP, ML) to evaluate security, privacy, and compliance risks.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Common Awards summative assessments, Durham guidance says students must not use generative AI to create substantive content that they present as their own creation.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Durham Common Awards AI academic-misconduct policy is scoped to students' use of generative AI in summative assessments on Common Awards modules.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Durham's public DCAD generative-AI resources page lists an internal Institutional Policy on Generative Artificial Intelligence for Learning, Teaching and Assessment dated June 2025.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

At King's College London, submitting AI-generated text as one's own without written departmental permission is considered misconduct under third-party involvement or text manipulation offences.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

King's College London supports considered use of generative AI and is open to evolving teaching, assessment and feedback practices according to need and disciplinary differences.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

King's College London subscribes to the Russell Group's five principles on generative AI in education, including supporting AI literacy, adapting teaching and assessment, and ensuring academic integrity.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Swansea University's AI assessment policy says staff and students should not enter identifiable information into any AI application, and are not permitted to upload student assessment or identifiable data without explicit written consent.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Swansea University's AI assessment policy says staff and students are not permitted to present work completed by AI applications as their own without acknowledgement.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Swansea University has a policy for responsible use of AI applications, including generative AI, in assessment, applying to faculty staff, students, and professional service staff involved in assessment or AI use within the University.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

At CUHK, improper or unauthorized use of AI tools in learning activities and assessments constitutes academic dishonesty and is subject to penalties including failure grade, suspension, or termination of studies.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

CUHK defines four approaches to AI use in courses: (1) prohibit all use, (2) use only with prior permission, (3) use only with explicit acknowledgement, and (4) free use without acknowledgement requirement.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

CUHK penalties for academic dishonesty involving AI tools may include reviewable/permanent demerits, failure grade, suspension, lowering degree classification, and termination of studies.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UQ course profiles must clearly state if, when, and how AI (including Machine Translation) is allowed. Two options exist: Option 1 prohibits AI in in-person assessment; Option 2 permits AI use with mandatory referencing.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UQ has disabled the Turnitin AI writing indicator functionality for all assessments from Semester 2, 2025, citing that AI detection tools are flawed and unreliable.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UQ says students must acknowledge where they used AI in assessment, including direct quotes or paraphrases of AI-generated content and use of AI tools for summarising, brainstorming, planning, editing, or proofreading.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For each examination, the UHH orientation framework says the relevant examiner or examination board must decide whether generative AI systems are permitted as aids, and unauthorized aids are governed by examination regulations and usually lead to a failing mark.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The UHH orientation framework says personal data must not be used in generative AI, including UHHGPT, while German supervisory authorities are still examining the lawfulness of personal-data processing in the underlying ChatGPT model.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The UHH orientation framework says teachers and students should use generative AI reflectively and responsibly, check AI-generated content for correctness, and use generative AI only within legal, exam, data-protection, copyright, and good-scientific-practice requirements.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Regulation 32 states that assessed student work should not contain content produced by another person, website, software, or AI tool except where AI use is explicitly permitted.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Regulation 32 says use of websites or generative AI software that generates answers or references is prohibited, while some Schools may allow AI tools for specific purposes and any AI use must be referenced.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Glasgow student guidance says using AI or other computational aids in university work without acknowledging the input counts as academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Gothenburg study-rules PDF states that, for take-home examinations, written tasks, or equivalent, AI-generated content may not be presented as one’s own work and examiners should specify the limits for permitted use of generative AI tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Gothenburg student guidance says the university does not prohibit generative AI in education; teachers and examiners decide whether, when, and how it may be used in coursework and examinations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Gothenburg student guidance says generative-AI guidelines vary between courses, programmes, departments, and faculties, and that teachers and examiners are responsible for communicating those guidelines to students.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Aston University's 2024/25 student discipline regulations define misusing AI tools as an academic offence where AI use is not permitted and a student uses AI tools to generate assessment content submitted as their own original work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Aston University staff guidance says each assessment brief must explicitly state whether generative AI use is essential, optional, or prohibited.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Aston University's 2025/26 general regulations update identifies unreferenced use of artificial intelligence in an assessment in contravention of the relevant assessment brief as an academic offence category.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Edinburgh Napier University's Assessment Policy states that inappropriate use of Generative AI in assessment, including presenting generated content as a student's own work, is cheating and a breach of the Academic Integrity Regulations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Edinburgh Napier University's generative AI position states that the university does not permit Gen AI detection tools on student assessment submissions, and academic staff are not permitted to use external detection tools on student work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Edinburgh Napier University's Assessment Policy says every assessment will use the Assessment Declaration Cover Sheet for students to declare that the submission is their own work and acknowledge other-source contributions, including Generative AI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU/e allows AI tools as aids for general study and teaching functionalities unless an examiner explicitly forbids them, while keeping students and staff responsible for submitted work and educational activities.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU/e states that generating quantitative or qualitative research data with GenAI is fundamentally prohibited unless the examiner gives explicit consent.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU/e does not permit automated decision-making or grading based on a GenAI model without human oversight over the assessment process.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Macquarie student guidance categorises assessment tasks as Open or Observed: Open tasks allow generative AI with acknowledgement and student responsibility, while Observed tasks may restrict or prohibit AI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Macquarie's AI policy says University-provided AI tools and systems are subject to privacy, security, intellectual-property, intended-use, and risk-assessment controls.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Macquarie student assessment guidance says Unit Guides are the definitive source for whether a task is Open or Observed, with iLearn providing more detailed assessment information.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Queen's assessment guidance says module staff will clarify if and how AI can be used in assessment, and students should consult their tutor if in doubt.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Queen's AI position page says its staff and student AI guidance is based on RAISE principles: responsible use, AI best practice, integrity, support, and equitable access.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Queen's assessment guidance says students who misuse AI will be subject to the University's academic misconduct regulations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

RMIT academic integrity guidance says students cannot use AI to complete or contribute to an assessment task unless specifically allowed, pass off unreferenced AI-produced ideas as their own, or submit AI-produced content they cannot understand or explain.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Before RMIT initiates its AI Governance Framework for an AI initiative, existing governance assessments include Privacy Impact Assessment, Security Risk Assessment, and Third-Party Risk Assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

RMIT assessment guidance tells students to review and fact-check AI outputs and acknowledge AI tools when those tools contribute ideas, text, images, or other content to assessment work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For UWA assessments assigned Tier 1, students are not permitted to use AI in any way to complete the assessment, and any AI use during that Tier 1 assessment is treated as academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For UWA coursework assessments, AI tools may only be used where the Unit Coordinator explicitly permits them; permitted use must be cited, referenced, and clearly acknowledged.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UWA student assessment guidance describes three AI-use tiers that lecturers may apply to assessment tasks: Tier 1 no AI, Tier 2 AI assistance or collaboration, and Tier 3 fully embedded AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Student guidance says students must not use GenAI to do their critical thinking, analysis, evaluation, synthesis, or to generate essays, poems, or creative works.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Course Coordinators must provide students clear guidance on what GenAI tool use is permitted for work submitted for assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Student guidance says learning materials and assessment information must not be entered into GenAI tools without explicit permission from the author, and students should never enter personal and sensitive data into GenAI tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Basel says it is not planning a general ban on AI-based tools, and that lecturers can decide case by case whether to integrate AI-based tools into teaching, exams, and assessments or restrict their use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Basel AI citation guidelines say AI-supported tools may only be used in a supporting role for work submitted for credit, with students retaining a controlling role and responsibility for their own work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In its AI teaching scenarios, the University of Basel identifies compliance with data protection and copyright law, including assessing tools from those perspectives, as part of productive AI-tool integration in learning and teaching.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Bath Academic Integrity Statement requires students submitting assessment to confirm they have not presented content created by generative AI tools as though it were their own work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Bath assessment guidance uses ABC GenAI categories: Type A means GenAI is not permitted, Type B means optional assistive use for specific defined processes, and Type C means GenAI is integral to the assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Bath teaching guidance says that from 2026/27 it will move to a two-lane approach, with a closed lane where GenAI must not be used and an open lane where GenAI engagement is necessary or optional.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Dundee student guidance says GAI tools should not be used to generate essays or assessment answers that are then submitted as the student's own work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Dundee guidance states that submitting work that is not one's own, including unauthorised use of GAI, is considered academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Where lecturers permit GAI sources in assessment work, University of Dundee student guidance says students must transparently acknowledge, describe, and reference how they used GAI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Exeter follows a four-tier GenAI assessment model from 2025-26: AI-integrated, AI-assisted, AI-minimal, and AI-prohibited.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For AI-integrated and AI-assisted assessments, Exeter requires students to include AI prompts and, where possible, hyperlinks to outputs in their references.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Exeter says AI-minimal assessments allow AI only for spelling and grammar checking, and AI-prohibited assessments do not allow GenAI tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Leeds assessment guidance says students can use generative AI to help learning but cannot use AI to generate or falsify work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Leeds assessment guidance uses a red, amber, and green traffic-light system to indicate how GenAI should be used in taught student assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Leeds postgraduate researcher guidance says PGRs must not use GenAI to write their thesis, transfer report, or other work, falsify work, or breach research assessment and examination guidance.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Leicester's Generative AI policy provides a university-level framework for appropriate AI use in learning, teaching, and assessment activities.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Leicester policy states that staff and students must not use generative AI in ways that collect, store, access, or share personal data without explicit consent.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For assessment, the University of Leicester uses three categories for generative AI use: red where AI must not be used, amber where AI may support assessment but not generate submitted content, and green where AI may generate assessment content within the brief.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Malta student FAQ guidance tells students to check with their tutor before using Generative AI tools to produce answers in summative assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Malta academic-staff guidelines say lecturers decide if and how Generative AI is permitted in a study-unit; if assessment instructions do not mention Generative AI, use is assumed not allowed except for listed support uses.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Malta academic-staff guidelines discourage use of AI writing detection tools at this stage and state that Generative AI detection software cannot be used as proof for disciplinary procedures.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Strathclyde Student Discipline Procedure lists unauthorised use of Generative Artificial Intelligence tools and services as an example of behaviour that may give an unfair academic advantage.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Strathclyde guidance tells students to check module or department guidance to determine whether AI tools may be used in a specific assessment and to what extent.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Strathclyde guidance says use of Gen-AI in learning and assessment is not necessarily or automatically academic misconduct; context determines whether misconduct is a concern.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Western Sydney University's Use of Artificial Intelligence Policy guides responsible and ethical AI and generative AI use for learning, teaching, assessment, research, and administrative functions, and applies to all students and staff.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Western Sydney University's Academic Integrity Guidelines say inappropriate use of generative AI in assessment tasks may lead to penalties under the Student Misconduct Rule.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Western Sydney University's student guidance says generative AI rules differ by assessment task and students are responsible for reading Subject Outlines, checking vUWS, or asking the Subject Coordinator rather than assuming the same advice applies across tasks or subjects.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

DMI's student guide cautions students that sources proposed by an LLM should always be verified.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

DMI's student guide says AI use should be avoided when it involves sharing personal or sensitive data of students or faculty.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

DMI's student guide says AI should not be used to replace personal study, critical reflection, or autonomous production of assessed work such as essays, reports, or exercises.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

FAU's central exams page states that if AI is not expressly permitted in exams, especially written papers, it is an unauthorized aid and can lead to the exam being failed for deception.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

FAU describes its AI-in-teaching guidelines as orientation and inspiration and states that they do not have Satzungscharakter; teaching and exam-related rules remain part of the individual study and examination regulations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

FAU guidance says instructors are responsible for clear AI-use rules in teaching activities, especially exams, and that students must disclose generative AI use according to the relevant course rules.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

HU Berlin’s recommendations allow examiners to use AI to create exam materials, but say examiners remain responsible for suitability and that sole use of AI to grade exams or study work is prohibited.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

HU Berlin’s exam and study-work AI recommendations are explicitly non-binding; they say AI use is generally allowed, while faculties and examination boards may make subject-specific binding decisions that restrict or prohibit AI use for particular assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

HU Berlin’s recommendations advise documenting student AI use so examiners can account for the tool use during assessment, while leaving the concrete documentation requirement to the relevant subject and examination context.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Unless explicitly authorised, using generative AI to create assessed work may be treated as an academic offence such as contract cheating under Imperial's Plagiarism, Academic Integrity & Exam Offences regulations. Improper use of AI can be investigated under the University's Academic Misconduct procedures.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Individual departments at Imperial may allow or prohibit the use of generative AI for specific assessments. Local (team/department/faculty) instructions take precedence over university-wide guidance. Students should check their department's current policy on using and disclosing generative AI in academic work and follow their module leader's instructions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Research at Imperial that involves people, personal data, or sensitive topics may require ethics approval, a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA), and data-governance controls before using any AI tool. Researchers must verify whether their use of AI in research requires special approval, particularly when uploading private or confidential research data.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

IS&T recommends that MIT community members consult with IS&T before purchasing or using generative AI tools, and recommends using tools already licensed by IS&T for the MIT community.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

MIT maintains a list of approved generative AI tools licensed by IS&T for use by the MIT community. Only these tools are approved for use with low- and medium-risk information, and any tool not on the list requires contacting [email protected] for assessment before use or purchase. No generative AI tools are approved for use with High Risk MIT information.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

MIT prohibits the use of generative AI for purposes that may require in-depth risk assessments without prior consultation with [email protected]. Such purposes include recruitment and hiring of employees, evaluating student academic performance, making investment decisions, and complaint and dispute resolution.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

When 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.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Chief Examiners have overarching responsibility for designing and setting assessment conditions, including communicating and verifying the responsible use of AI within assessment tasks.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

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.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NMBU's generative AI guidelines require students to clearly indicate how and where AI-based programs have been used, and to account for AI use in assignments or other work submitted for assessment or compulsory activity.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NMBU's generative AI guidelines state that AI-based programs are permitted in accordance with the guidelines, while individual course descriptions may state that AI-based programs are not permitted for exams or other assessed work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NMBU's generative AI guidelines state that AI-based programs will normally not be permitted in written examinations on campus; for take-home exams, students must follow the AI-use specifications in the exam paper and course description.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

QUT's Academic Integrity Policy treats unauthorised or inappropriate technology use as a breach when it replaces or obscures a student's own effort, misrepresents authorship or understanding, or undermines assessment validity.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

QUT's Assessment and Feedback Procedure requires unit outlines to include a statement about the use of technology such as artificial intelligence tools in assessment-item descriptions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

QUT student guidance says a unit coordinator will tell students whether GenAI can be used in preparing or completing assessment tasks.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Saarland University guidance says unauthorized use of generative AI in coursework or examinations, or failure to document it when required, is deception and may invalidate coursework or examinations and, in serious cases, lead to loss of examination entitlement.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Saarland University guidance says using generative AI as an aid for coursework and examinations is generally allowed, but instructors or examiners may restrict it to certain functions or prohibit it entirely.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Saarland University guidance says generative AI should have the status of an aid and must not replace students' own work; assessment requirements should ensure significant student contribution.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Stockholm University's central chatbot guidance says suspected unauthorized AI-chatbot use in an examination should be investigated and, if there is well-founded suspicion of cheating, reported in the same way as other cheating cases.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Stockholm University's central chatbot guidance recommends that teachers and examiners decide what AI-chatbot use is allowed or impermissible, noting that this may differ from course to course.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Stockholm Business School says use of generative AI in examinations or mandatory assignments is prohibited unless explicitly allowed in the study guide or examination instructions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Berlin examination guidance states a general documentation duty when AI is used for assignments: students should identify the tools, extent, purpose, marked AI content, prompts, and their own contribution.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Berlin's living AI guidelines say fully automated assessment of study or examination performance is not permissible; AI output may not be adopted one-to-one and digital tools such as AI may serve only as aids.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Berlin examination guidance tells students they remain fully responsible for all AI-generated content; errors or inaccuracies in AI output count as the student's errors, and AI may support work but may not take over the actual work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For student assessment, TU Dublin guidance says generative AI can only be used in ways approved in advance by the lecturer, and that failure to follow the guidelines or inappropriate AI use may result in disciplinary action as a breach of academic integrity.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Dublin recommends using the Artificial Intelligence Assessment Scale when designing assessments and communicating with students about how generative AI may be used in a specific assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Dublin's GenAI teaching and learning guidance says personal data should not be entered into GenAI systems that are not supported or approved by the University, and that students should not collect, store, or upload personal data to a GenAI system without permission or consent.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

PolyU takes an open and forward-looking stance on the use of GenAI tools as a positive and creative force in education, and expects that the usage of generative AI will become a normal part of learning, teaching, and assessment from 2023/24 Semester One.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

PolyU guidelines state that work submitted for assessment must be the student's own work and must not be a copy or version of other people's work or AI-generated material.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

PolyU states that while it embraces the use of GenAI tools in education, students must adhere to high standards of academic integrity in all forms of assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Trinity's GenAI assessment guidance states that submitting GenAI-generated content as a student's own work is considered plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Trinity's College Statement treats AI and GenAI as relevant to teaching, learning, assessment and research while identifying risks including academic integrity, ethics and privacy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Trinity College Dublin says specific uses of GenAI in an assessment must be disclosed, properly acknowledged, and referenced; students should explain what, when, and how they used GenAI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Universität Jena's exam-law page states that if AI is used in examinations, the examiner must expressly allow AI as an aid and students must state the use of tools such as ChatGPT for the assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For study and teaching contexts, Universität Jena guidance says AI use in scientific work or examinations may be used only as a supporting aid and only after consultation with the examiner.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Universität Jena guidance says generative AI tools must not be used as the basis or final decision for person-related decisions, including student examination assessments and researcher grant assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Toulouse Law School students, the AI guidelines permit study-support uses such as summaries, explanations, plans, practice QCMs, and reformulation, but say AI must not be used to fabricate all or part of graded work and list generation of exam papers, homework, case comments, or dissertations as prohibited uses.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Toulouse Law School teaching, training, and assessment activities, the AI guidelines say AI use by a student or teacher must be declared when it contributes to work that is submitted, published, or evaluated.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Toulouse Law School guidelines say homework may be corrected for pedagogical purposes but should not count toward continuous-assessment grades except where AI use itself is evaluated; in that case students must explain their method, describe AI use, and correct or analyze results.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UEA's plagiarism and collusion policy permits AI to help students understand material and expression, but says using AI to complete an assessment, or part of it, is plagiarism and may reach contract cheating.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UEA's teaching and learning policy does not prohibit generative AI use, and says each School of Study should meet at least annually to discuss generative AI's impact on assessment design and set School-level expectations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UEA's research and innovation policy requires a self-assessment process when generative AI will be used, built, or developed in UEA research, subject to listed exceptions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Greenwich 2025 Assessment and Feedback Policy says staff will provide students with the university guide on referencing generative AI, a video on using AI effectively, and the Declaration of AI use via the VLE to support understanding of acceptable AI usage in assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Greenwich 2025 Assessment and Feedback Policy says assessment will be designed to maintain integrity and standards where students have access to generative AI, and encourages staff to incorporate generative AI as a learning tool while facilitating responsible student use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Greenwich student AI guidance encourages students to use AI to aid learning, while telling students to acknowledge AI use in assignments by adding a declaration and not to copy and paste directly from an AI tool for submitted English-language work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Kent's Academic Integrity and Misconduct policy defines unauthorised AI use as using generative AI beyond the scope permitted for a specific assessment, or failing to acknowledge permitted use appropriately.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Kent's AI principles say academic judgement about student work remains with academic staff, and AI will not be used to make marking or academic-outcome decisions unless explicitly authorised, clearly communicated, pedagogically justified, and subject to human oversight.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Kent's student AI academic-integrity guidance says that, unless specifically instructed otherwise, submitted assessment content must always be the student's own work and students should not include AI-generated material in submissions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Liverpool lists unacceptable uses of generative AI in education, including unreviewed copying of AI-generated content into assessment materials or feedback, using AI for grades or final assessment decisions, uploading protected student or confidential information to public AI platforms without required review, and creating or modifying official policy documents without appropriate review and approval.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Liverpool has a central AI policies and guidance hub that collates generative AI guidance covering golden rules, legal/security/data protection, learning/teaching/assessment, and research.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Liverpool's central GenAI learning, teaching, and assessment page says the University has devised guidance to help academics and students understand its position and make informed decisions on when and how to use GenAI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNC-Chapel Hill's administrative generative AI guidance says sensitive information should not be entered into generative AI tools unless the Information Security Office has completed a risk assessment and the Data Governance Oversight Group has approved the tool for sensitive information.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNC-Chapel Hill's faculty grading and assessment guidance says students must be able to request a full instructor-led review if they disagree with an AI-generated grade or have concerns about automated feedback.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNC-Chapel Hill's faculty grading and assessment guidance says AI systems used for grading or feedback must be institutionally approved and compliant with data security and privacy standards; faculty using GenAI for grading retain full responsibility for evaluative decisions and feedback.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Sussex staff guidance says module convenors determine and communicate AI-use permissions via module Canvas sites and choose one of three assessment-level permissions: AI use prohibited, AI in an assistive role, or AI with an integral role.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Sussex student misconduct guidance includes unauthorized or inappropriate use of digital technologies including AI, and gives examples including AI use where prohibited and submitting permitted AI-generated work without required acknowledgement.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Sussex staff guidance provides a prohibited-use assessment statement saying generative AI tools must not be used to generate materials or content for that assessment, while allowing other assistive technology for registered reasonable adjustments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UZH guiding principles say faculties should ensure equal opportunities and fair assessment conditions whether AI tools are permitted or prohibited, and that UZH will uphold academic integrity and penalize violations of its disciplinary or integrity rules.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UZH recommendations say faculties and study program directors are responsible for specific generative-AI guidelines and should ensure students know whether and how generative AI may be used in assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UZH recommendations say a declaration of authenticity can address generative-AI tools, that the person completing it should confirm only permitted aids or tools were used, and that any generative-AI use must always be indicated.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Aarhus University student guidance says students who use GAI in an exam project must submit a declaration naming the applications and explaining how they were used, and unchanged GAI output used in an exam project must be cited like other secondary-source quotations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Aarhus University student guidance says that when GAI is not allowed for an exam, students are not allowed to use GAI for proofreading or feedback on the exam text, and for internet-allowed exams where GAI is not allowed students may do regular web searches but may not actively use AI functions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

AU Educate guidance for teaching staff says that from fall 2024 students are allowed to use GAI in all AU exams unless academic regulations or the course description explicitly state that they may not, and it advises teachers to read those rules for their courses.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ADA University's Honor Code treats violating exam, test, and assignment rules, accepting unauthorized help, and using someone else's intellectual work without proper credit as unacceptable behavior.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ADA University's Student Assessment Regulations say assignments are to be designed and conducted to minimize plagiarism and cheating risk, including contract cheating, and that students are to receive clear instructions on avoiding academic-integrity breaches.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ADA University's Student Assessment Regulations require submitted take-home exams to include a signed and dated academic-integrity declaration confirming the work is the student's own and that all sources used were acknowledged.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Adelaide University's Academic Integrity Policy treats inappropriate use of AI that subverts an assignment or gives unfair academic advantage as an example of academic misconduct, including submitting AI-produced work as the student's own or using AI-generated information without acknowledgement.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Adelaide University's invigilated online exam rules state that students may use only tools, software, or materials explicitly approved in exam instructions, and list AI tools such as ChatGPT as not permitted.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Adelaide University coursework assessment, the Assessment Procedure states that course coordinators will ensure students are informed about appropriate use of generative AI and similar tools in the course.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Birkbeck's student AI guidance states that the AI Declaration must be submitted with all assessments submitted to, or completed on, Moodle, including assessments where the brief permits no AI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Birkbeck's student AI guidance says students should use AI tools, including generative AI, only to the extent outlined in the assessment brief, and should not use them where the brief explicitly does not permit them.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Birkbeck's Academic Integrity and Misconduct policy includes using generative AI tools such as ChatGPT to create assessment content or argument presented as the student's own intellectual work within its description of contract cheating, unless generative AI use is permitted in the assessment brief with guidance.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Caltech admissions prohibits applicants from copying and pasting directly from an AI generator, relying on AI-generated content to outline or draft essays, replacing their unique voice with AI-generated content, or translating essays via AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Caltech admissions permits applicants to use AI tools like Grammarly or Microsoft Editor for grammar and spelling review of completed essays, to generate brainstorming questions or exercises, and to research the college application process.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Caltech HSS generative AI policy applies to all assignments including major papers, exams, discussion board posts, reflections, and problem sets.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Concordia CTL guidance says Concordia has not approved or acquired online AI detectors and therefore staff or faculty use of them is not permitted because of privacy laws and regulations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Concordia CTL assessment guidance says all staff and students have access to Copilot Chat through an institutional Microsoft 365 license, with Concordia authentication and Enterprise Data Protection.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Concordia's educational technology guidelines say a Privacy Impact Assessment is required whenever third-party technology uses, shares, or stores personal information, and that a written agreement with Concordia is required after a successful PIA.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Students are responsible for the content of work they submit. Performance assessments must be conducted independently and personally; GenAI may serve a supplementary role but not replace student efforts.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Lecturers determine whether and how GenAI may be used in their courses and for respective assessments. Teaching materials created with GenAI must be subjected to quality control by the lecturer.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Violations of GenAI guidelines such as use of unauthorised aids or non-disclosure of their use are subject to disciplinary action under existing performance assessment rules and the declaration of originality.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Flinders states that students are responsible for using AI consistently with University, course, topic, assessment, and academic integrity requirements, including acknowledging generative AI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Flinders provides staff with AI assessment scale template instructions that range from no AI permitted through prompted, assisted, task-completion, and full AI use, with acknowledgement expectations attached to permitted use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Flinders' staff good-practice guide recommends that staff take steps to design for academic integrity and artificial intelligence.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For exams, FU's Eckpunkte state that using AI tools that are not expressly permitted is treated as unauthorized aid or deception about independent performance; when AI tools are permitted, their use must be marked and documented.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The KI.Assist@FU terms prohibit use of the chatbot to process personal data and exclude use for correcting or evaluating student work or otherwise assessing students' abilities and knowledge.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For exams, FU's Eckpunkte urgently advise against mandatory AI use for the time being and state that automated AI assessment of learning outcomes and exams is prohibited until further notice; AI may at most support preparation, with the examiner retaining the final assessment decision.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Goethe University Frankfurt's student-facing Lehre virtuell guidance says students who intend to use AI in an examination context must discuss what is allowed with their instructors and should assume no explicit permission is equivalent to a prohibition.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Goethe University Frankfurt's teacher-facing assessment guidance recommends defining clear rules for AI use, making AI use transparent, and using AI detection software only as supporting evidence rather than as the sole basis for proof.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Goethe University Frankfurt's general Lehre virtuell guidance states that the university generally supports testing and applying generative AI in study and teaching, while noting ethical, legal, and didactic considerations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Griffith's academic integrity page states that uncited content created using generative artificial intelligence software is conduct that always constitutes Academic Misconduct, and that representing AI-generated assessment content as a student's own work is Academic Misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Griffith's student generative AI guidance warns that many open or public tools do not guarantee confidentiality and advises users not to enter personal information, information about others, or course materials such as assessment tasks or marking rubrics.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Griffith's student-facing generative AI guidance says students may use generative AI for self-study without citation, but for assessment tasks they must acknowledge its use and include a short declaration if they use it while completing the task.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Students may not submit content generated with generative AI as their own without disclosure, and using AI in exams, assignments, or academic assessments is treated as cheating unless the course instructor permits it.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

King Saud University's 2025 Student Learning Assessment Policy supports use of generative AI tools in service of the educational process while emphasizing original submitted work, disclosure of AI use, and faculty authority to permit or prohibit generative AI use by assignment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

King Saud University's assessment policy says the university supports using generative AI tools in education while emphasizing knowledge, skills, and awareness needed to regulate use and understand AI-generated information or data.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Kingston University's 2025/26 Academic Integrity procedure defines unacceptable use of generative AI as presenting AI-generated content as one's own without proper acknowledgement, except when the assessment brief explicitly permits it.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Kingston University's AG2 guidance says that if generative AI is used as part of the editorial process, the student must acknowledge that use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Kingston University's AG2 editorial-help guidance covers software tools including generative AI when students use third-party help in draft or final assessment work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Korea University tells instructors not to enter personal information, academic records, assessment questions, or other sensitive or non-public materials into AI tools, with special caution for external AI services.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Korea University tells learners not to enter personal information, non-public learning materials, or assessment questions into external AI tools, and to remember that AI inputs may be stored or reused.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Korea University recommends designing assignments and assessments to show learners’ critical thinking, creativity, problem-solving process, and their own reasoning even when AI is used.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

KTH tells students that generative AI use in graded assignments and exams should follow the course-specific information, and that the teacher's course rule takes precedence over general guidance.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

KTH teacher guidance says teachers need to assess how possible generative AI use in a course can affect learning and write course-specific information about acceptable use based on that assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

KTH teacher guidance tells staff to remind students that, in any assessment, students shall honestly disclose help received and sources used.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

When faculty permit student GenAI use, Kuwait University's policy says faculty may require students to identify the GenAI tools used, the assignment parts generated or assisted by GenAI, and the prompt used for each part.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Kuwait University's GenAI policy says faculty may use GenAI to create classroom materials, but should always verify GenAI results when grading projects, homework, or exams because GenAI might not be accurate or fair.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Kuwait University's November 2024 GenAI policy says it encourages optimal GenAI use while regulating artificial intelligence use to prevent misuse, and it covers students, faculty, and employees.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

LMU IfKW student guidance says AI may be used in assessments only with explicit teacher permission; if no explicit permission is given, students must assume AI use is not allowed.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

LMU IfKW guidance treats verbatim or minimally changed AI-generated text without proper attribution as plagiarism, and says significant unattributed AI-generated text in assessed work can receive grade 5 (failed).

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

LMU teaching guidance recommends adapting e-exam questions for ChatGPT-era assessment, including tasks that require critical reflection on ChatGPT limitations rather than simple knowledge or comprehension questions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Manchester Metropolitan University's 2025/26 Academic Misconduct Policy treats unauthorised generative AI use in assessment, where a student attempts to gain an unfair advantage by passing it off as their own work, as academic misconduct that may be investigated under the policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Manchester Metropolitan University tells students to check the assessment brief for specific instructions on generative AI, says they should only use AI as directed, and says they cannot use it to create the assessment itself.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Manchester Metropolitan University library guidance says some generative AI uses do not need citation, but documented AI-assisted search strategies, approved research-project AI use, AI-generated media in submitted assessments, and AI-generated code or Excel formulas must be cited or referenced.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Maynooth University assessments, the student GenAI guidance states that if teaching staff or department guidelines do not clearly indicate GenAI use, no GenAI is permitted.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Maynooth University student GenAI guidance says GenAI tools will not be used by staff to grade or provide feedback on students' assessed work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Maynooth University student GenAI guidance says GenAI may support learning and assessment when used appropriately and with permission from department lecturers; students should consult department staff about allowed use for each assignment or task.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

McMaster's operational excellence generative AI guidelines tell employees not to upload confidential, personal, personal health, or proprietary information to a generative AI tool unless required security/privacy assessments have been completed, while noting an enterprise Microsoft Copilot exception when logged in with McMaster credentials.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

McMaster's Provost academic integrity page says McMaster has not activated Turnitin's AI Detector, while privacy/security and reliability assessment work is underway and activation may allow retroactive submissions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

McMaster's privacy considerations page says that for tools including automated functions, including artificial intelligence, the university must conduct an Algorithmic Impact Assessment, with the Privacy Office responsible for the AIA process.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Nankai University's undergraduate AI tool norm prohibits AI use for confidential or sensitive-content creation, uploading confidential content to AI platforms, generating or altering core arguments or research data, academic misconduct such as ghostwriting, plagiarism, or copying, and AI use in listed midterm and final assessment formats unless a teacher explains a special-use case in advance.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Nankai University's undergraduate AI tool norm permits students, with course teacher or supervisor consent and where core assessment or innovation is not affected, to use AI tools for literature search and management, grammar and formatting support with marked generated content, chart production from real data, and code assistance subject to author review and testing.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Nankai University's trial undergraduate teaching AI tool use norm applies to undergraduate teaching, learning, examination, evaluation, and management activities, while encouraging teaching units, teachers, and students to use AI tools reasonably in specified teaching and learning contexts.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NUS states that instructors should be transparent about where and how they deploy AI in courses, including for generating content, virtual tutoring, and assessment feedback.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NUS requires prior approval from Head of Department or relevant Deanery before using AI tools to provide instruction, feedback, or marks to students, submitted via an AI Risk Assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NUS policy sets the default assumption that AI tool use is permitted for unsupervised (take-home) assessments, provided use is duly acknowledged; assessments forbidding AI must be conducted in-person and instructor-supervised.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For exams, the guide says AI-tool use is at the discretion of teachers; if no corresponding rule has been made, AI tools are unauthorized aids and are not permitted.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Salzburg guide says teachers and thesis supervisors set, for each course, assessment, exam, or supervised thesis, whether and to what extent AI technologies may or should be used, and that these requirements for assessed work should be communicated transparently and in writing in advance.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Senate recommendation says curriculum commissions may identify exams to be taken in secure environments or by analog means to prevent AI use, and may identify exams where AI instruments are useful or desired, especially using the university-licensed Academic AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For the Philosophical Faculty, the page says use of AI without examiner approval is treated as attempted deception and graded 5.0.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Philosophical Faculty examinations, the page says AI may be used by students only when explicitly and uniformly permitted for all examinees in a cohort or seminar.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Bonner Zentrum für Lehrer*innenbildung written work, the page says use of AI applications such as ChatGPT is prohibited unless explicitly allowed by examiners, and otherwise is an unauthorized aid.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

RWTH's scenario catalog states that assessment of examination work using AI systems is not permissible at the present time, while limited help drafting feedback may be conceivable if it gives the AI no decision-making role, transfers no personal data, and is finally checked by humans.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

RWTH's CLS documents hub presents a generative-AI legal guidance package and states that these legal-aspect documents are currently available only in German.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

RWTH's exam-related questions document treats unauthorized use of AI systems in exams as an attempt to deceive, but says suspicion should not primarily be based on automatic AI-detector evaluation.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Stanford Graduate School of Business (GSB) MBA and MSx courses, instructors may not ban student use of AI tools for take-home coursework, including assignments and exams. Instructors may choose whether to allow AI for in-class work. For PhD and undergraduate courses, GSB follows the university-wide Generative AI Policy Guidance from the Office of Community Standards.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Stanford School of Medicine MD and MSPA programs have a formal AI policy: students may use AI for learning, clarification, and grammar/style editing unless contrary to assignment instructions. AI use for closed-book exams or assignments where internet is restricted is prohibited unless explicitly authorized by faculty. Students are responsible for all AI-generated content they submit, must disclose and cite substantial AI contributions, and violations may result in disciplinary action.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Stanford Law School instructors set their own AI policies; in the absence of a course-specific policy, students may use generative AI to support learning and develop or refine their own ideas, but may not use AI to generate content presented as their own work. Using AI during an exam or to draft/revise submitted work is not permitted unless disclosed in advance and explicitly authorized in writing by the instructor. Unauthorized use may result in an F grade and/or referral to Stanford's Office of Community Standards.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Stellenbosch University requires postgraduate students to declare any use of AI tools and provides internal and examination declaration processes for postgraduate research work.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Stellenbosch University's Senate-approved AI position statement provides governing principles for ethical AI use in research and teaching-learning-assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For assessment, Stellenbosch guidance says AI-generated content may not form a substantial part of an assessment unless permitted, and interim guidelines advise that students should know whether AI use is allowed for each assessment task.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Darmstadt provides a generative AI handreichung as orientation for students and lecturers, covering reflected, transparent use, good scientific practice, and context-specific rules for examinations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Darmstadt's HDA guidance says students remain responsible for submitted work, while lecturers decide whether and how AI may be used in an examination task.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Darmstadt's Computer Science department treats AI tools as examination aids under APB section 22(7), says they must be listed in written work when used, and warns that undisclosed or prohibited use can trigger suspected deception under APB section 38.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The URZ ChatAI page states that, compared with commercial providers, no data is stored at GWDG or elsewhere or used for training, and open-source models are hosted directly by GWDG.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

A TU Freiberg news item says DeepSeek R1 is available to university members through a GWDG agreement for privacy-compliant testing via AcademicCloud services.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

A TU Freiberg PDF guide for the Professur für Rohstoffabbau und Spezialverfahren unter Tage states that AI-tool use in student and scientific documents must be clearly identified; unmarked AI use is evaluated as attempted fraud.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For assessments, UON's GenAI teaching, learning and assessment policy says students should follow teaching-staff directions about GenAI use and appropriately disclose and reference GenAI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UON's GenAI teaching, learning and assessment policy says use of GenAI in assessment does not automatically constitute academic misconduct, but may do so where lecturers or course coordinators have explicitly prohibited it.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UON's GenAI teaching, learning and assessment policy says GenAI should not be used to mark student work unless the output is reviewed and approved by the course marker or coordinator, and any GenAI marking use must be clearly communicated with an opt-out opportunity for students.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCL uses a 3-category assessment framework for GenAI: Category 1 requires own work only; Category 2 permits GenAI with acknowledgement; Category 3 includes essential GenAI use as part of the assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCL defines academic misconduct in the context of GenAI as gaining an unfair advantage over other students; there is no single list of fair and unfair uses as it depends on the assessment category.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCL permits using GenAI to help with spelling, grammar, and language tone in assessments, but it must not change the content and meaning of what the student has written.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UAEU's student GenAI policy applies to all university students and to student work submitted for academic credit.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UAEU prohibits student use of GenAI in specified assessment contexts unless the course instructor states otherwise.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UAEU permits student use of GenAI in an assistive role when the tutor specifies the permitted processes within the assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The 2026 AI-and-examinations handbook states that AI detectors are not reliable and do not provide legally secure proof of deception.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The official e-assessment AI page says using AI such as GPT.UP may not be a condition for passing an assessment, and AI should not be used by instructors for full creation and grading of summative examinations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The 2026 AI-and-examinations handbook advises examiners to state early and in writing whether and how AI may be used in a course and assessment, and to use transparency rules when AI is allowed or cannot be explicitly excluded.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UGA's AI reference framework says use of tools mobilizing AI is prohibited by principle for knowledge assessment unless explicitly authorized, with study regulations and assessment modalities specifying the AI-use framework.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Outside knowledge assessment, UGA's AI reference framework leaves AI-use instructions to the teacher and teaching team, while stating that an AI tool must not substitute for the student's exercise of the skills used in the assignment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UGA's AI reference framework strongly discourages transmitting unpublished or unpatented research work to a generative AI tool, for example for translation or summarization.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Université Paris-Saclay's 2025-2026 first-cycle exam rules say that, for Licence professionnelle, Licence, and Licence double-diplôme students covered by the rules, use of ChatGPT or another AI tool must be explicitly mentioned when it is not prohibited, and failure to mention AI as a source will be sanctioned.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Université Paris-Saclay's 2025-2026 master exam rules say that use of ChatGPT or another AI tool must be explicitly mentioned when it is not prohibited, like any external source borrowing or citation, and failure to mention AI as a source will be sanctioned.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In the Graduate School Droit context, the Université Paris-Saclay IAG working-group article says a guide of good practices and evaluation support for law teacher-researchers is being drafted.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For UCC taught-programme assessments, academic integrity is breached if students submit GenAI products as their own work without acknowledgement and without authorisation to use GenAI for the task.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCC's academic integrity policy says the University does not sanction use of GenAI detection software for detecting or investigating alleged academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCC's Academic Integrity for Examinations and Assessments Policy applies to work presented or submitted by registered students for examination, assessment, or credit in taught programmes.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

PGR students at University of Bristol are not permitted to use generative AI tools such as ChatGPT to write any text used in their thesis or APM reports, as research degree students must demonstrate ability to write about research in their own words.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Bristol considers the use of AI or translation tools to be cheating if used for more than generating the occasional short phrase within a sentence or checking basic grammar and spelling, unless assessment instructions allow more comprehensive use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Bristol uses a four-category system for AI use in assessments: Category 1 (prohibited - no AI use), Category 2 (minimal - spelling/grammar only, default), Category 3 (selective - certain tasks as specified), and Category 4 (integral - AI required for assessment).

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The UC Berkeley Academic Senate recommends that for assignments where GenAI is not permitted, instructors should adopt enforcement mechanisms such as in-person proctored exams, an additional oral exam component, or a written statement of academic integrity, since no validated GenAI detection tools exist.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UC Berkeley warns that AI use involving highly-consequential automated decision-making requires extreme caution and should not be employed without prior consultation with appropriate campus entities including the responsible unit head. Examples include legal analysis, recruitment/personnel decisions, replacing represented employees, facial recognition security tools, and grading or assessment of student work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UC Berkeley has AI risk assessment pre-screening questions that employees can use to gauge the level of risk involved for an AI use case where AI is integrated into a product, service, or feature at the university. Depending on the risk level determined, the CERC-AIR subcommittee may be engaged for a broader risk assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Cologne Justitiariat says an exam or significant parts of an exam fully generated by AI are not an independent performance and are prohibited as deception.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Cologne Justitiariat says AI use in examinations is not objectionable under examination law when the student still produces their own independent work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For term papers, theses, take-home exams, papers, and similar work, the University of Cologne Justitiariat says AI use is generally possible if independent work remains, and examiners may require disclosure of both the AI use and the related prompts depending on the use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Within UNIGE's Faculty of Science, a formal declaration of generative AI use is required for all bachelor's, master's, or doctoral work and for academic assessment or production leading to a degree or official title.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Within UNIGE's Faculty of Science, teachers are free to allow or prohibit AI use in courses and assessed assignments, and must define the framework and referencing requirements when generative AI is permitted.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNIGE guidance says academic work and learning assessment must include clear instructions about whether students may use generative AI tools, and that use of those tools must be supervised.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Hohenheim guidance says generative AI systems are generally permitted as aids in unsupervised written exams such as term papers, seminar papers, and theses when their use does not conflict with the exam purpose; the examiner or module supervisor decides for the specific assessment.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

When generative AI tools are permitted for written work, University of Hohenheim materials say students submit an AI-use declaration in addition to the usual declaration of originality, with the exact contents determined by the examiner.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The GPTalk guide tells students not to use GPTalk as their sole source, to enter no personal data, to remain responsible for the content as authors, and to make AI use transparent; it also says lecturers may not use GPTalk to correct or assess student work.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Luxembourg guidance says generative AI use should be disclosed according to each course and assessment, with course guidelines serving as the primary point of reference.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Luxembourg assessment guidance says chatbot use in assignments should align with academic integrity and scientific judgement, and students should disclose where and how the chatbot influenced the text.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Luxembourg assessment guidance says a substantiated suspicion of unauthorized chatbot use triggers disciplinary procedure for academic fraud and plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For educational activities, the University of Milan permits AI-supported self-assessment when explicit, but does not permit delegating learning assessment to AI tools when the assessment contributes to the final exam grade.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In educational settings, the University of Milan advises that students must explicitly declare AI use in assessed work and that teachers must explicitly declare AI use in educational activities.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Milan has an AI governance document intended to promote ethical, legally compliant and conscious use of AI tools, with annexed guidelines for teaching, research, third mission and administrative activities.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Munster central guidance states that whether generative AI systems may be used for examination work depends on the assessed competency and is set by examination regulations and examiners; for work where expression, translation, or code creation is itself assessed, use is generally not permissible.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Faculty 06, the dean's office recommends that generative AI content in examination work be clearly cited, that an explanation of tool use be added, and that full prompts and AI responses be appended; instructors may adapt or reduce these documentation and citation duties for individual exams or courses.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University and State Library Munster advises users to ask instructors or their university before using generative AI for academic work and warns that AI use in examination documents can be evaluated as attempted deception.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNE's Student Academic Integrity Policy includes artificial intelligence tools in its example of work substantially written by someone else, within the policy's breach framework for undergraduate and postgraduate award and non-award coursework students; the policy states it does not apply to higher degree by research courses.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

A UNE School of Education public myLearn information page tells students that computer programs, artificial intelligence tools, or other tools should not be used to write or produce any part of an assessment response unless explicitly referenced and in line with unit coordinator advice for the assessment task.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNE's public Learning Online academic integrity myLearn section states that a Generative AI and Academic Integrity at UNE module exists and lists module topics including general principles for use of generative AI, Turnitin detection and AI, and referencing generative AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNC Charlotte's Center for Teaching and Learning says its AI syllabus guide provides flexible course-level examples and does not provide or use a university-created AI policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNC Charlotte Student Accountability & Conflict Resolution recommends that faculty clearly communicate what AI use is permitted in courses, academic exercises, or assessments, and identifies written notice about how and when AI tools may be used as a best practice.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNC Charlotte Student Accountability & Conflict Resolution provides assignment and exam sample language stating that, where AI use is permitted, transparency is required and failure to disclose AI use may be considered a Code of Student Academic Integrity violation.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Penn researchers should obtain IRB approvals prior to exposing research participant data to AI tools and should exercise caution when research involves high-risk data including PII and health information.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In the absence of other guidance, Penn students should treat the use of AI as they would treat assistance from another person — if it is unacceptable to have another person substantially complete a task like writing an essay, it is also unacceptable to have AI complete the task.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Wharton Academy prohibits students from using AI to complete personal reflection or opinion-based tasks, from using AI to complete group assignments instead of collaborating with peers, and from using AI to cheat on exams or tests.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Plymouth Faculty of Science and Engineering guidance says AI tools such as ChatGPT should generally not be used to generate the final version of assessed work, unless the coursework briefing clearly states an exception.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Plymouth Faculty of Science and Engineering guidance states that using ChatGPT or similar AI tools to generate assessed work for submission is considered plagiarism and a breach of the university's academic offences regulations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Plymouth Faculty of Science and Engineering guidance describes limited AI uses such as brainstorming, planning, structuring work, proofreading, checking typos, generating example code, and exploring how code works.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Reading assessment guidance uses a three-category GenAI framework: Category 1 prohibits GenAI use, Category 2 permits GenAI as a tool to aid development of the assessment, and Category 3 actively encourages and evaluates GenAI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Reading student guidance tells students to assume Category 1 when an assignment brief says nothing about GenAI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Reading student guidance says DeepSeek is blocked and must not be used on University devices or networks.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Sharjah's AI academic-texts policy applies to master’s and doctoral theses, thesis proposals and research plans, thesis-derived scientific publications, graduate-level courses and programs, and academic texts submitted to Graduate Studies bodies.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For the covered graduate context, University of Sharjah strictly forbids AI-based tools in exams and quizzes and treats extensive use of ChatGPT or other generative AI tools to complete assignments as academically dishonest.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Sharjah states that plagiarism and AI-text detection tools may be used only as supportive instruments and that no disciplinary decision shall be based solely on automated detection output.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Tasmania guidance says unapproved, inappropriate, or unacknowledged use of generative AI may be considered dishonest or unfair behaviour and therefore a breach of academic integrity.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Tasmania guidance says whether AI is encouraged or not allowed can vary by assessment, and students should check assessment instructions or confirm with the Unit Coordinator if unsure.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Tasmania guidance says generative AI tools should only be used to support learning and assist with assessment completion, while submitted work must be the student's own and follow the assessment task instructions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UToledo's Academic dishonesty policy lists representing the words, ideas, or information of an artificial intelligence program as one's own without proper documentation as an example of academic dishonesty, and says faculty are expected to tell students what materials and procedures, including artificial intelligence programs, are authorized.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Within the University of Toledo College of Law default rule, generative AI may be used for research-like search, grammar correction, and other functions attendant to completing an assignment, but may not compose submitted assignment text and may not be used for any exam purpose unless an instructor deviates in writing with notice.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Toledo maintains a central Office of the Provost AI Policies page that points instructors to optional syllabus language for AI and links to a College of Law generative AI policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For the UniTS 2025/2026 PROGRAMMAZIONE [160IN] course, students must explicitly declare any use of Large Language Model tools such as ChatGPT in exam-related content, including partial use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For the UniTS 2025/2026 PROGRAMMAZIONE [160IN] course, the teacher reserves the right to use an oral exam to further investigate a student's actual contribution to any produced content.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Trieste Department of Humanities page on AI describes several AI tools as useful for preparing learning units, lessons, assessments, and teaching materials, and says ChatGPT can support lesson planning, tests, rubrics, quizzes, and BES/DSA content adaptation.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UiT tells students that, when AI use is permitted for exams or assessments, they must describe how they used the tool and cite AI-edited content.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UiT says the course coordinator defines the extent to which AI tools may be used in teaching, assignments, and exams, and exam instructions must specify permitted aids including any allowed AI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UiT describes four AI levels for exams and assessments, ranging from human-only work to advanced AI collaboration, with corresponding documentation expectations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Waterloo's Academic Integrity page says instructors should state whether AI tools such as ChatGPT are allowed for assignments, tests, or exams, and that students who do not follow those instructor rules are subject to Policy 71 academic-misconduct processes.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Waterloo IST says review processes assess AI tools used with University data for security, privacy, and contractual risks.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For units or individuals deploying AI-enabled systems that process University data, Waterloo IST says projects must undergo an Information Risk Assessment and receive Information Steward approval before using University data.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Utrecht University uses an AI index for students as a five-level scale for how AI may be used, with teachers able to choose levels for a course or specific assignments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Utrecht University's researcher guidance says personal or sensitive data should not be used as GenAI input unless the user is certain data protection law is respected.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Utrecht University says AI tools should be allow-listed according to an AI assessment framework.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Victoria University's Academic Integrity Policy lists submitting work derived from a generative AI model without permission or correct acknowledgement as a breach of academic integrity.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Victoria University says users who want to use alternative AI tools must assess them using the AI Risk Classification Model, follow AI Steering Committee guidance, and register AI tools in the planned AI Registry.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Victoria University's Academic Integrity Guidelines say assessment tasks may explicitly allow or disallow text-generating tools, and staff course teams decide and communicate expectations to students.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ZHAW has a public university guideline, valid from 1 March 2025, on the use of generative AI systems in assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For ZHAW examinations, specific generative AI systems are not allowed unless they are explicitly stated as permitted aids.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For evaluating assessments, ZHAW says teaching staff may use generative AI only as an aid for open-ended task formats and should refrain from using software to detect AI-generated text for assessment purposes.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Altai State University's official UЦОТ advisory says AI assistants are available to teachers for online-course content, course/test generation, and related educational-material workflows.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Altai State University's official UЦОТ advisory describes ASUProctor as an AI-algorithm proctoring system that records prohibited actions during online testing and gives teachers a report for later decision-making.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Ashoka University's Academic Integrity Policy applies to students doing coursework, research, thesis work, partner-university coursework, study-related internships or placements, and work with University Centers; it expects original work, source acknowledgement, independent assignment completion where applicable, and honesty during examinations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Ashoka University's AI@Ashoka page is an official AI research-initiative page that describes interdisciplinary AI and machine-learning projects; it is not presented in the extracted text as a student AI-use policy, assessment rule, or approved-tools policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Auburn student-facing academic-integrity guidance tells students to review the syllabus and ask the instructor before using AI on coursework.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Auburn guidance says instructional faculty may encourage or restrict student AI use in courses and should give students clear expectations and disciplinary-consequence awareness.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For ACU coursework students, unauthorized or undisclosed use of generative AI, paraphrasing or translation tools is listed as academic misconduct unless use is authorized in the assessment requirements and properly acknowledged.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ACU Library guidance tells students that GenAI may be permitted in some contexts, but assessment use should be clearly authorized and acknowledged, and final work should reflect the student's own analysis and understanding.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Bournemouth University academic-offences guidance lists using artificial intelligence software to write all or part of an assignment and claiming the work as your own as an example of an academic offence.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Bournemouth University's 6H taught-awards policy defines academic offences as attempts to gain unfair advantage in assessment by deception or fraudulent means and frames academic integrity around responsibility for one's own work, acknowledging others' work, honest reporting, and avoiding unfair advantage.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Cardiff University's 2025/26 Academic Regulations and Policies include a teaching, learning and assessment expectation that providers establish communicated approaches to technologies such as Generative Artificial Intelligence and define misuse of those technologies.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

A Cardiff Learning and Teaching Academy post reports that Cardiff published updated staff guidance on AI in education on the intranet and worked with students on guidance for ethical and responsible generative AI use in learning.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Chalmers Library's student guidance says whether and how AI tools may be used in examinations is decided for each course by the coordinator and examiner, so students should ask at the beginning of each course.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Chalmers Library's ethical-use guidance says users should not upload sensitive or private information, copyright-protected material, or text intended for a thesis, dissertation, or scientific publication to chatbots.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

COMSATS regulations on unfair means and academic dishonesty apply to all students of the institute and include copying from any paper, book, note, or electronic device, or using or attempting to use such or other unfair means, during examinations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

COMSATS unfair-means regulations treat intentionally or knowingly representing another person's words or ideas as one's own in an academic exercise, and failing to attribute quoted, paraphrased, or borrowed material, as unfair means.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Cornell's committee report states that any information educators are obligated to keep private under FERPA or HIPAA should not be shared with generative AI tools or uploaded to third-party AI vendors.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Cornell's committee report does not recommend the use of generative AI for summative evaluation or grading of student work, stating that evaluation and grading is among the most important tasks entrusted to faculty.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Deakin guidance says students should acknowledge genAI use where it contributed to developing assessment work and should include tool, access date, prompts, output, and where it was used.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Deakin student guidance says genAI may be used as a starting point for some study tasks, but not to write the final assessment or do the work being assessed.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The IFÉ Édurevue n°154 discusses generative AI in relation to plagiarism, cheating, assessment design, and academic integrity; it cites examples of other universities' AI charters but does not establish an ENS Lyon AI-use charter.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The ENS-hosted CultureSciences Physique site has a teaching-resource item on generative AI, teaching, and evaluation that points to external resources; the page is a resource pointer and should not be treated as ENS Lyon institutional policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

EPFL requires students to disclose the use of AI tools in assessment work. EPFL rules (Lex 1.3.3, Article 4) require that all assessment material that is not the student's personal and original contribution must be recognizable as such.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

EPFL recommends that teachers make explicit to students what AI use is not legitimate in a course and what rules accompany AI tool use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Ewha's class-stage AI-use guidance says course guidance may state that copying generative-AI outputs directly into assignments or exams, fabricating or spreading false information with generative AI, infringing copyright with generative AI, or otherwise harming academic truthfulness and trust may be considered misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Ewha's class-stage AI-use guidance presents course-level generative-AI use as something instructors may define by explaining whether and how AI use is allowed and by asking students to disclose how they used generative AI in assignments.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The MSc Accounting and Finance master thesis guidelines warn that AI outputs may be inaccurate or hallucinated, say students remain responsible for evaluating AI outputs and appropriate use, and state that Turnitin plagiarism checking is mandatory before final manuscript submission.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Faculty of Economics and Management bachelor thesis guidelines state that students remain responsible for evaluating AI outputs and warn that AI-generated text may create plagiarism risks; they also say Turnitin plagiarism checking is mandatory before final manuscript submission.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Georgia Tech OIT says Institute technology services and tools must undergo comprehensive review, and third-party AI plugins are disabled pending comprehensive risk review.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Georgia Tech OIT academic guidance says courses that wish to embed assessment integrations with AI should directly consult CTL.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Graz treats AI tools in examinations as unauthorized aids unless they are explicitly permitted, and the public teaching page says unpermitted AI use in assessment can make an examination attempt invalid due to cheating.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Graz guidance requires transparent labelling of AI-supported tool use where applicable and cautions against entering personal, confidential, trade-secret, or NDA-protected data into AI applications.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

HKBU describes its Principles for the Use of Generative AI Tools in Teaching and Learning, and Assessment as Senate-approved in June 2023 and effective from AY2023/2024.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

HKBU student academic-integrity guidance says academic dishonesty can lead to disciplinary actions, including reduced or failing grades, suspension, or academic dismissal.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Institut Polytechnique de Paris's 2025-2026 Master programs academic regulations prohibit the use of generative AI in assessments for those programs unless explicitly authorized by the instructor in written instructions. Unauthorized use constitutes academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Le règlement des études 2025-2026 des masters de l'Institut Polytechnique de Paris interdit l'utilisation de l'intelligence artificielle générative dans les évaluations de ces programmes, sauf autorisation explicite de l'enseignant dans ses consignes écrites. Tout manquement est considéré comme une fraude.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Iowa State guidance says confidential data classified as moderate or above may not be entered into any generative AI product unless assessed and approved under ISU data classification and applicable compliance processes.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Iowa State Student Conduct guidance says suspected AI-generated coursework referrals will be reviewed similarly to other forms of academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

JGU library guidance says the university is generally open to AI tools, but instructors or institutes may decide whether tools are allowed for a given assessment, and allowed use should be disclosed as an aid.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

JGU's digital teaching guidance encourages integrating AI literacy and transparent use of AI into teaching and, where appropriate, assessment design.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Johns Hopkins guidance describes potential instructional uses of generative AI tools, including course-material generation and adaptive personalized feedback.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Johns Hopkins Teaching @ JHU generative AI guidance hub includes dedicated topics for FERPA guidelines, HIPAA guidelines, ownership of data, and ethical considerations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Keele's Student Academic Misconduct Code of Practice classifies inappropriate GenAI use in assessment as academic misconduct when a student presents work as their own without proper attribution or uses GenAI where it is explicitly prohibited.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Keele's framework says students must be advised on how AI can be used in assessments and that this must be clearly stated; it also says staff should remind students to disclose AI-tool use and cite it properly.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

KU Leuven student guidance says clear misuse of GenAI, where output is largely generated by GenAI and the student is not transparent about tool use, can be considered an irregularity under Article 84 of the Education and Examination Regulations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

KU Leuven teaching guidance expects teaching staff to clearly inform students whether GenAI may be used for assignments and expects students to be transparent about GenAI use so assessment can be fair and correct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

La Trobe University policy requires an AI Adoption Risk Assessment for procurement or acquisition of all new AI systems/tools and for new use cases of existing university-approved AI systems/tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

La Trobe MyLaTrobe guidance says that when a subject allows AI use in an assessment, students need to submit an AI Acknowledgement, with the LMS indicating whether AI is permitted and what type of use is allowed.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For examinations, LUH limits any mandatory AI use to centrally provided LUH systems, permits student choice of AI systems for independently written work only where exam rules allow and AI-generated content is identified, and prohibits automated correction or full/partial entry of exam work into an AI system.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

LUH student guidance says students should clarify with instructors how AI tools may be used for coursework or exams and remain responsible for lawful, responsible, and transparent use or non-use of AI tools; the ZQS page itself is explicitly non-binding.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Lund University's student guidance says students who want to use GenAI for a compulsory assignment or examination must check whether it is permitted and how to report its use; presenting GenAI-generated work as one's own may be treated as cheating.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Lund University's student guidance says students should primarily use Lund-licensed tools such as Microsoft Copilot Chat and Google Gemini, and must not upload other students' work, sensitive personal data, or copyright-protected material.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

MLU guidance prohibits automated grading or assessment of student examination work by AI; assessment remains the responsibility of examiners.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

When students use generative AI for study or assessment work, MLU's guideline says the systems and purposes or types of use are to be named and documented.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

McGill guidance says users should mitigate potential privacy concerns by removing personally identifying information when using AI tools, be careful with sensitive or restricted material, and avoid using Personal Health Information (PHI) or Payment Card Industry (PCI) data with AI tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

McGill's Provost-endorsed principles state that instructors remain responsible for comporting themselves according to the highest standards of academic integrity in their use of generative AI tools. Instructors must be explicit in course outlines about the expectations for use of generative AI tools and may set limits on their use in assessment tasks.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Middlesex states that generative AI tools may be used in assessments only as specified by the module leader, and allowed use requires written acknowledgment, extent of use, generation details including prompts, and citation or referencing where generated material is not adapted.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Middlesex guidance says assessment criteria should make clear when and how students can use AI for each assessment, and how to acknowledge AI use appropriately.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Murdoch University Library says AI functionality in its databases and systems is tested by a Library Generative AI working group against criteria that include functionality, accessibility, technical requirements, privacy, data protection, rights, and ethics.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Murdoch University Library guidance says the AI tools listed in its guide have been tested by its Generative AI working group and must pass the listed criteria to be considered for use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NITT's 2024 PG Regulations classify possession of mobile phones, carrying unauthorized notes, communicating with other students, or copying during an assessment as punishable academic dishonesty, with zero marks for offenders.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NITT's 2024 PG Regulations say each course faculty prepares a course plan and that the course plan outlines assessment components, attendance requirements, academic integrity guidelines, and study material information.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

MEPhI lists a 2026 professional-development programme for school teachers and education administrators on AI tools, lesson-material creation, checking assignments, detecting signs of AI use, and legal foundations of AI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In an official April 2026 MEPhI news item, Rector Vladimir Shevchenko framed generative AI as a challenge to text- and code-based assessment and pointed to personal professor-student communication as a response; this is rector commentary, not a binding university policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NSYSU's student generative AI guidance says students may not use generative AI tools for plagiarism or ghostwriting, cheating on exams, or privacy disclosure.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NSYSU's student academic integrity guidelines include cheating through unauthorized aids, tools, or electronic devices in coursework, assignments, or examinations when instructor consent has not been given.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NTHU's Chinese AI guideline gives assessment recommendations: depending on the course, AI assistance may be allowed for assignments, but diverse submission formats are recommended; exam questions should emphasize deeper reasoning, creativity, analysis, and critical thinking.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In CTLD's example ethics statements for conditionally open generative-AI use, undisclosed usage may allow instructors, the institution, or relevant units to reevaluate an assignment or report or withhold scores.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

GPT NTNU guidance permits use with open and internal data, but says GPT NTNU must not be used to assess, process, or analyze information about people.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NTNU provides an official teaching and assessment AI guidance page for instructors, with links to resources on talking with students about AI and exams with AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Osaka University's TLSC assessment guidance says instructors need to choose assessment methods that respond to generative AI, share precautions with students in advance, and clearly state permitted and prohibited AI tool use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Osaka University's TLSC assessment guidance advises instructors to tell students that inappropriate generative AI use may be treated as academic misconduct, AI use should be limited to learning support, and AI use for analysis should be clearly stated.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Oxford Brookes describes its university-wide position on generative AI in teaching, learning, and assessment as a progressive embrace-and-adapt approach, with module leaders having discretion to advise on AI use in module assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Oxford Brookes guidance for schools, programmes, and modules says GenAI principles can be applied across disciplines and should be discussed at programme, course, and module level, with modules addressing equity and academic rigour and programmes advised to develop GenAI literacy and authentic assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

PUCV's academic-integrity policy frames ChatGPT-style tools as possible support for teaching only when students critically analyze the information before learning activities or assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

PUCV teaching-development guidance says syllabi and virtual classrooms should establish norms, restrictions, and prohibitions for AI tools during assessment instances.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Pusan National University's AI utilization guideline says instructors should communicate permitted or prohibited AI use for assessments, and it warns against deciding a student's grade solely from an AI plagiarism or AI-detection tool result.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Pusan National University's student AI utilization guideline tells students to first check and follow the instructor's AI-use instructions for exams and assignments, and to identify the tool, purpose, and scope when AI use is allowed.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Queen's AI Applications page states that the university has conducted security and privacy assessments for generative AI software and uses those assessments to identify risks and inform use guidelines.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Queen's describes responsible generative AI use through five guiding principles for students, staff, and faculty, including checks for whether a use is prohibited, permitted, encouraged, or required.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Royal Holloway academic misconduct regulations list requesting or engaging an artificial intelligence tool to write or rewrite work for unfair advantage, and presenting AI-generated content as one’s own unless authorised and acknowledged, as examples of assessment offences.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Royal Holloway tells Foundation, undergraduate, and postgraduate taught students that module assessment briefs take precedence for AI use; if a brief says AI is not permitted, students must not use it and must declare any AI use clearly and honestly.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

RUB's GPT@RUB usage directions say third-party personal data and sensitive third-party personal data may not be used as GPT@RUB input, and GPT@RUB or other AI systems may not be used for automated decision-making in examinations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

RUB's ZfW FAQ says generative AI tools can be used at RUB in research, teaching, and study, but that use can be restricted or tied to disclosure requirements in certain contexts such as written examinations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Rutgers OIT guidance says anyone considering purchase of an AI application for use at Rutgers must follow the same security processes and risk assessments as other software purchases, as well as Rutgers digital-accessibility standards.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Rutgers teaching guidance says GenAI detectors should be treated with caution and cites research indicating they cannot currently be recommended for determining academic-integrity violations because of accuracy limits and false-accusation risk.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Where Sciences Po assessment formats explicitly integrate AI use, the AI doctrine says students must document that use by detailing their work steps, naming the tools used, and adopting a reflective approach.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Sciences Po's official teachers' resources page says its framework for generative AI use by teachers will apply from the September 2026 intake and covers guiding principles, transparency toward students, and AI integration in teaching activities and assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Shanghai University's Qianxue Baike AI Smart Platform AI toolbox lists AI tools by categories including chat, paper writing, office writing, image, video, audio, coding, and other tools; this crawl did not find source text saying these tools are approved for assessed work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Shanghai University's Academic Affairs Department held a generative AI teaching report that discussed course-specific AI-enabled teaching uses such as AI teaching assistants, AI-assisted personalized case analysis, online-course construction, intelligent learning companions, agent collaboration, and literature reading comprehension.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Sorbonne University's 2024-2025 assessment rules state that assessment documents must be the student's or assessed group's personal work, AI use is refused unless explicitly authorized, and authorized AI use should mention the source.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Sorbonne University's 2024-2025 assessment rules treat unauthorized AI-generated work presented as one's own, or authorized AI use without source mention, as plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

SKKU instructor guidance presents five teaching strategies for using AI such as ChatGPT: creating examples, generating explanation styles, creating low-stakes tests, using GPT for learning diagnostics, and providing distributed practice.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

SKKU instructor guidance says AI cannot replace roles such as guiding discussion direction, providing personalized answers to student questions, and understanding learning level by assessing assignments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TalTech tells lecturers to explain acceptable AI-based software use in assessment, teaching, learning, and homework, and course-level permission or prohibition should be specified in the extended syllabus.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TalTech says substantive AI output must be cited or described as a method, and learners remain responsible for accuracy, quality, analysis results, and references.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Where KNU educational components allow generative AI under levels 2 or 3, the regulation requires students to declare the fact and manner of generative AI use in submitted artifacts for assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

KNU's regulation treats violations of generative AI use rules as academic-integrity violations and lists non-declaration, presenting generated content as one's own result, and using generative AI for unfair advantage among possible violations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

DTU's exam-cheating rules state that use of AI such as ChatGPT or similar artificial intelligence, where the program writes or solves a task, is plagiarism if no source reference is made.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

DTU states that it permits generative AI in teaching and open-internet exams, while current exam use is limited to selected courses and exams.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TUM ProLehre guidance recommends starting AI-use decisions from the intended learning outcomes and whether AI use supports, complements, or hinders those competencies.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TUM ProLehre guidance says reliable control of AI use is difficult to impossible, and recommends designing assessments so unauthorized AI use does not provide a decisive advantage.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Dresden's public AI-use guidance says unlabeled or unauthorized use of aids, including answers or results generated with AI-supported text-generation tools such as ChatGPT, constitutes deception under examination law.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Dresden's public AI-use guidance says teachers and examiners can decide whether and to what extent AI-supported text-generation tools such as ChatGPT are used, including as permitted aids in examinations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Hebrew University Teaching and Learning Unit frames its guidance goal as adapting teaching and assessment for AI use rather than banning AI use outright.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

A Hebrew University Teaching and Learning Unit workshop page says students make broad and frequent use of AI for assignments and academic writing, and frames excessive or unreflective use as a risk to learning goals.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

LSE requires departments or course convenors to classify authorised generative AI use in assessment as no authorised use, limited authorised use, or full authorised use, and to communicate the position to students.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For 2025/26, LSE requested departments to add assessment safeguards, including observed assessment methods, to help assure degree integrity and prevent unfair competitive advantage from generative AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

At the University of Edinburgh, presenting AI outputs as your own original work, submitting AI-generated text without acknowledgment, and using AI agents within university learning platforms constitute academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Edinburgh says using an AI agent within Learn or any university learning or assessment platform requiring login is not permitted.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Tools to detect AI-generated content are unreliable and biased and cannot be relied on to identify academic malpractice in summative assessment at Manchester. Output from such tools cannot currently be used as evidence of malpractice.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Using an AI tool to correct grammar or spelling is acceptable at Manchester, but students should ensure that use of the tool does not result in substantive changes to the content or meaning of their work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UTK Writing Center guidance says instructors may set different GenAI rules for each course, and the sample syllabus page presents open, moderate, and strict AI-use guideline examples.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UTK Libraries guidance says submitting generative-AI-created or rewritten assessment work as one's own is cheating, and advises students to check with professors and instructors about coursework use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UTokyo instructs faculty not to input exam questions directly into generative AI tools, as exams are highly confidential documents.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UTokyo advises faculty to test their own assignments with generative AI tools to understand how well AI can complete them, and use this understanding to inform assessment design.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Warwick's student-facing guidance says students may use AI only within requirements set out in assessment briefs and course handbooks, which may restrict or prohibit AI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Warwick's assessment-design guidance says generative AI use in student submissions needs thoughtful support so responsible use and clear demonstration of human achievement are maintained.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Tilburg School of Humanities and Digital Sciences exams, tests, and assignments, Tilburg University states that AI use is not permitted unless a lecturer explicitly states otherwise.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Tilburg University's TSHD fraud guidance includes submitting work that is partially generated by AI without permission among examples of fraud-related conduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Tohoku University's generative AI guidance cautions that unpublished research results, confidential information, entrance-exam information, and student or staff personal information can be exposed to service providers or other users through generative AI and translation services.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Tohoku University's staff-facing guidance suggests instructors consider, according to each class, whether to partially prohibit, warn about, or use generative AI; it presents these as examples rather than a single mandatory rule.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In education, Science Tokyo's guideline says the university does not totally restrict learners' use of generative AI; the permitted degree of use, including whether it is banned, is left to course objectives, course content, and instructor teaching and assessment policies, and students should follow instructor instructions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For courses, Science Tokyo's guideline asks instructors to teach students about generative AI limitations, consider assessment methods, and promptly reflect a course AI-use policy in the syllabus when the policy can be clearly stated.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TMU's Academic Integrity Office says students should assume that using AI to complete assessments is prohibited unless the instructor explicitly states otherwise.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TMU states that privacy and AI impact assessments and a security risk assessment were conducted before releasing the Gemini App and NotebookLM at TMU.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Dortmund's ChatGPT handout warns against using AI tools to check examination work and says uploading student names or matriculation numbers would implicate GDPR requirements.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Dortmund's digitalization strategy includes AI as a dedicated action field and lists integration of AI tools into study, teaching, and assessment practice as a goal.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCSI's postgraduate handbook states that electronic devices are prohibited items in the examination hall, and that open-book examinations do not include internet or computer-device access.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCSI's undergraduate handbook states that students must comply with handbook rules and that electronic devices are prohibited items in final examinations unless the practical examination requires computers.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Umeå University's student cheating and plagiarism page warns that using AI or similar services in examination to produce text and submitting it as one's own without openly disclosing how the material was created can amount to attempted misleading.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Umeå University's AI and examination work area is developing principles, examples, and working methods for sustainable examination practice, including transparent and responsible use of AI as a learning tool.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCP guidance says professors, students, and researchers are obliged to be transparent about their use of generative AI in academic materials, including materials used for assessment and academic progression.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In teaching contexts, UCP guidance says students should explain, in an appendix to written work, the process that produced AI-induced elements or reasoning; if that is not possible in the text, an oral discussion is recommended as a complementary assessment element.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Unicamp's generative AI deliberation allows students to use generative AI as support for information seeking, study, and learning, but says assessment activities must observe the limits and conditions defined by the course instructor when assessments exist.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Unicamp Scientific Electronic Journals Portal AI-use policy says generative AI use in journal submission, assessment, and editing processes must be declared explicitly at manuscript submission and in the manuscript.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UniPV offers an internal course for university language experts on integrating generative-AI tools such as ChatGPT and Gemini into language teaching.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UniPV's 2024-2026 ICT plan describes AI and machine-learning modules as part of security appliances used to help prevent or contain latest-generation cyberattacks.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Biotechnology bachelor's thesis guideline says students should not insert automatically generated scientific text into the thesis, replace bibliographic research with AI, or use AI-generated text without critical and personal reworking.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For the University of Udine Biotechnology bachelor's thesis guideline, generative AI tools are described as usable for limited support such as grammar/spelling correction, technical-term translation, and orienting summaries, not as a substitute for the student's own thesis work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNIVPM's Research Ethics Committee regulation says the committee provides opinions, assessments, and checks on request for university research projects and governing bodies, and that the committee's opinions are binding for the requester.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNIVPM has official statutes/regulations sources for ethics, conduct, and research integrity; this run did not verify a separate university-wide generative-AI teaching, assessment, or student-use policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Universitat de Valencia's UVdocencia integrity-focused GenAI course frames GenAI use in relation to academic and research integrity, including guidance on assessment activities, regulation of GenAI use in teaching instruments, and detection of inappropriate student use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Universitat de Valencia's UVdocencia ChatGPT course introduces generative AI tools, including ChatGPT, for producing content and creating materials and tasks in education and scientific research.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For teaching and examinations, Universität Innsbruck's FAQ says course leaders may decide which AI tools are permitted unless a faculty has its own rules, should communicate rules clearly, and should explicitly identify permitted aids including AI tools for examinations; unnamed aids are prohibited.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Universität Innsbruck Faculty of Business and Management guidance says AI-generated content incorporated into a student's own work must be labeled without exception and must not be presented as the student's own work, otherwise plagiarism may occur and later annulment of assessment could result.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For study or examination work, the guidance says instructors must state in writing which aids are permitted and that unauthorized aids, including AI where not allowed, are assessed through the usual deception framework.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The central examination-office page lists KI-related self-declaration forms for multiple bachelor and master thesis contexts and links good-scientific-practice materials.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Mannheim AI FAQ says AI use in study is possible depending on context, but for each exam students should clarify with the responsible teacher whether and under what conditions AI-system use is permitted; serious non-compliance may lead to final failure of an exam component.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In an official 2023 teacher handout, Universität Mannheim's Zentrum für Lehren und Lernen advised teachers that ChatGPT is neither generally allowed nor generally prohibited and that teachers should decide for each exam whether and under what conditions students may use it and communicate that decision in time.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Universität Stuttgart guidance for teachers says examiners decide whether AI is allowed for a given assessment, choose one option for each assessment, document it in the syllabus or ILIAS, and communicate it early and consistently.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For exams, Universität Stuttgart states that the relevant examiners decide the extent to which AI-system use is allowed or desired, and students should ask examiners if uncertain.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Universite de Lorraine's 2025 exam charter states that use of tools, including generative artificial intelligence, is fraud when it is not explicitly authorized.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Universite de Lorraine DACIP teaching guidance recommends favoring sovereign and secure generative AI, training on ethical issues, and transparency with students in pedagogical and assessment processes.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In assessments where generative AI use is authorized, Université de Rennes' AI charter says students must declare the use of generative AI in the relevant passages and prohibits submitting AI-generated output without saying so in place of the requested work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For teaching missions, Université de Rennes' AI charter says AI must not substitute for a teacher's act without supervision and verification, and AI tasks affecting student assessment or admission must be human verified in a demonstrable way.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Université Laval guidance says AI-use expectations should be stated in the course plan and clarified in assessment instructions when AI use is authorized.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Université Laval guidance says using AI tools is not automatically an academic offence, but unauthorized use may constitute an academic offence under the student disciplinary regulation.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Universiti Malaya guidance says lecturers specify the permitted level of AI use for each assignment or assessment, using levels from no AI use through integrated AI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Universiti Malaya guidance requires students to declare AI tools used in assignments or assessments and says failure to disclose AI use may be considered academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Universiti Teknologi Brunei has a Senate-approved GenAI guidance section for UTB students' usage in module assessments in its Student Report Manual.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For UTB module assessments, the GenAI guidance says the lecturer will specify the permitted level of GenAI usage for each coursework item.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UTHM's Digital Teaching and Learning Policy permits the use of generative artificial intelligence in teaching and learning processes, including learning content, activity implementation, and assessment, subject to suitability, assessment effectiveness, compliance with applicable guidelines, laws and regulations, and good principles, values, and ethics in the course field.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UTHM's Digital Teaching and Learning Policy says assessment should be designed to be contextual, fair, transparent, and personalized while taking into account the risk of generative AI misuse in written assignments, and that continuous assessment involving presentations, question-and-answer, and viva voce should be prioritized to assess students' actual mastery.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UUM's online and take-home assessment guideline states that, for closed-book online final exams, students are not allowed to collaborate, must sign an honour form, and submissions may be checked via Turnitin.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UUM's assessment handbook says it provides guidance for instructors in undergraduate and postgraduate programmes on closed-book, open-book, and 100% coursework assessment options.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University College Dublin publishes University Management Team-approved AI Governance Principles for institutional AI use, including human oversight, fairness, transparency, compliance, ethical design, AI literacy, stakeholder engagement, and risk assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCD Teaching and Learning assessment guidance advises educators to be transparent with students about permitted AI use and to apply more robust approaches for high-stakes graded assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Balamand students are responsible for the integrity of submitted coursework; the Academic Integrity and Copyright Policy says students must do their own work unless the instructor asks otherwise, may collaborate on graded work only if instructed to do so, and must follow course requirements specified in the syllabus.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Balamand Academic Integrity and Copyright Policy treats plagiarism as passing off another person's work as one's own and lists examples including undocumented text, quotations without quotation marks, undocumented paraphrase or summary, untranslated text without citation, and packaged online information or completed papers submitted without acknowledgment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The UC Davis School of Medicine policy says medical students may not use generative AI to directly author submitted assignments or generate answers for closed-book assessments unless faculty or course leadership gives written permission.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UC Davis IET states that Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat is available at no additional cost to UC Davis and UC Davis Health students, faculty, and staff, but sensitive data should not be uploaded without a Vendor Risk Assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCR's student-facing AI announcement says students should discuss generative-AI expectations with professors, use AI to assist or enhance rather than replace original work, avoid generating entire deliverables, and cite AI-generated content or data when used.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCR's public generative-AI guidance for instructional settings places course-level use decisions with the Instructor of Record rather than setting one universal student-use rule in the evidence reviewed here.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UC San Diego's Academic Integrity Policy says students may not let academic work or academic credit be completed for them by another human or by machine/artificial intelligence, and may not use unauthorized aids including artificial intelligence in coursework or assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UC San Diego Academic Integrity Office student guidance says that if an instructor has not said a student can use GenAI for a class or assessment, the student cannot use it; silence does not equal permission.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For teaching periods commencing after 1 February 2026, the University of Canberra says its GenAI assessment position uses three assessment-use categories: Permitted, Guided, and Restricted.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Canberra says it provides students with free and protected access to Microsoft Copilot and Dall-E, with access through UC credentials.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCT has published an AI in Education Framework for teaching, learning, and assessment, endorsed by the Senate Teaching and Learning Committee in June 2025, and it frames AI literacies, assessment integrity, and AI-enabled innovation as its roadmap.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Before procuring generative AI tools, UCT staff or departments should consult ICTS and the tools must undergo information security and privacy risk assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Colombo says AI use in assessments is not permitted unless instructions explicitly authorize it, and unauthorized AI use in summative assessment is considered cheating and an examination offence.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For teaching, University of Colombo says AI tools must not be used to mark or grade student work, generate evaluative feedback, or contribute to summative assessment decisions unless institutional review, validation, quality assurance, and meaningful human oversight are in place.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Galway's QA220 Academic Integrity Policy identifies submitting all or part of an assessment item produced using artificial intelligence and claiming it as one's own work as an example of academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Galway's Academic Integrity Office guidance for DSS-related literacy software says excessive or irresponsible use of GenAI-powered literacy software may constitute a breach of academic integrity and advises students to use only DSS-approved literacy software versions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For supervised examinations, University of Göttingen guidance says AI tools are not permitted unless explicitly allowed.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For unsupervised examinations, University of Göttingen guidance says AI models should generally be permissible aids, but use of AI tools must be transparent.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For University of Guelph courses, acceptable student use of AI is determined by the course instructor and may vary by discipline, program, and assessment type.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Guelph library student guide tells students to check the syllabus or ask the instructor before using generative AI for coursework.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Haifa's e-learning unit provides lecturers with a Hebrew resource introducing digital tools for online learning and assessment and AI-based tools for teaching and learning aids.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Haifa Education Technologies master's program page says the program addresses relationships between AI-era technologies and learning, teaching, and assessment, and presents technology and AI as means for human, attentive, socially responsible pedagogy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Helsinki student guidance treats prohibited use of large language models, or failing to report their use as instructed, as cheating; the cheating and plagiarism guidance also lists presenting AI-generated text or solutions as one's own as plagiarism.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Helsinki guidance says large language models may generally be used in teaching and writing support, while course teachers can restrict or prohibit use on pedagogical grounds and AI cannot be used in maturity tests.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Idaho OIT guidance says agentic AI tools should not receive credentials to university systems, should not be installed on systems with moderate- or high-risk data access, and should be tested in a sandboxed workflow.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Idaho's OIT and AI Execution Group memo advises faculty to provide clear guidance on AI use in their syllabi in Canvas.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Illinois Enterprise GenAI guidance for service providers includes security controls, audits, MFA, and data privacy compliance for AI systems and sensitive data.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Illinois Graduate College states it does not have a policy on permissibility of generative AI in doctoral milestones, and encourages programs and committees to communicate their expectations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Limerick assessment guidance states that use of AI in an unauthorized manner is a breach of academic integrity, and that use not permitted by the module leader is a breach of academic integrity.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Limerick guidance says GenAI use in assessment beyond the specifications of the module lead or programme lead is considered academic misconduct and related concerns should be managed under the procedures for academic misconduct allegations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

At Instituto Superior Técnico, a Pedagogical Council deliberation was reported as saying there should not be a general prohibition on AI tools in teaching processes or assessment methods.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

At Instituto Superior Técnico, the reported deliberation called for assessment methods to make explicit whether AI tools are permitted.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Manitoba teaching guidance discourages broad or mandatory student use of GenAI systems for learning or assessment until the university is assured that personal data entered into such systems is protected.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Manitoba's AI guiding principles say UM must implement appropriate risk assessments and operational controls so UM data is not compromised, privacy is maintained, and intellectual property is protected.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For coursework, UMD tells students to assume GenAI use for assignments and assessments is not allowed unless the syllabus or assignment instructions specify otherwise.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UMD's TLTC sample syllabus page gives instructors non-binding example AI course-policy language spanning prohibited, limited, and broad AI use, with citation or attribution expectations where applicable.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UMKC tells instructors not to upload or copy and paste student work into generative AI products for assessment because doing so may violate FERPA.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UMKC presents restrictive, supervised, and permissive generative AI syllabus policy examples and tells instructors to determine which category their syllabus may fit under.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNL guidance states that using AI or other technology output as one's own work is an academic-integrity infringement unless the instructor gives explicit permission.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNL Libraries provides citation guidance for ChatGPT and other AI tools, including APA, MLA, and Chicago examples.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNH's Academic Integrity policy treats unauthorized use or attempted use of AI tools as cheating, and treats computer-generated text or work submitted as one's own without proper citation or attribution as plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

USNH's AI chatbot KB identifies DeepThought and Microsoft Copilot as USNH-provided AI options, recommends signing into Copilot with a USNH account for enterprise data protection, says public chatbots such as ChatGPT and Bard are not secure, and says alternative AI solutions must complete the Security Assessment Review process before purchase or implementation.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Under the University of Oulu education guidelines, teachers may define course or assignment AI use as required, prohibited, restricted, or allowed.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

When AI use is permitted in education, the University of Oulu guidelines say data protection requirements and the university's personal-data-processing guidelines must be followed.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The guidelines treat generative AI as support for teaching, learning, and research, not a replacement for human work; AI-generated content should be examined, approved, modified, and supervised by a human author.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The guidelines list non-appropriate or non-permitted academic uses of AI, including creating entire written content with AI, using unrevised AI-generated code, using AI-generated code in university exams, and using AI to evaluate exam or selection materials.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For student performance assessment, the University of Pecs guideline says the university does not recommend using automated decision-making systems or large language models for substantive qualifying evaluation.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Pecs AI guideline is scoped to educational and research activities needed to meet study requirements and applies to university citizens when they use AI systems in connection with setting, meeting, or evaluating course and training requirements.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Rector Measure R 567 states that AI outputs are only input material for the author; the author is responsible for using, critically examining, and verifying those outputs, and the author of the student work is the student, not the AI tool.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Rector Measure R 567 says proven use of AI tools contrary to the measure is treated like plagiarism, as unethical conduct with possible disciplinary consequences, and proven unauthorized or undeclared AI use after a successful defense can lead to proceedings on invalidity of the state examination or defense.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Southampton guidance says students are allowed to use GenAI tools like ChatGPT to develop learning and support studies, but should never submit work created or part-created by GenAI for assessments they claim as their own.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Southampton guidance lists acceptable GenAI uses such as arranged assistive technology, study-buddy support, clearly referencing GenAI use, and summarising complex ideas or academic texts; it lists copying GenAI output into work, asking GenAI to write or rewrite work, asking GenAI to answer an assessment question, and sharing module tutor materials in a GenAI tool as unacceptable uses.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

St Andrews Good Academic Practice policy treats presenting AI output as a student's own work without acknowledgement as unauthorised use of AI, except where an assessment specifically permits or encourages such tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

St Andrews student guidance says students should not use generative AI for assessed work unless the module coordinator explicitly authorises it, and any AI use should be declared on an assessment coversheet.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UTS's AI Operations Procedure requires a six-stage identification, assessment, approval, implementation, and management process before developing, deploying, procuring, or activating AI systems or AI capabilities.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UTS Education Express says university misconduct rules apply to AI use in assessments, students must acknowledge AI-tool use, and students should only use AI tools to generate verbatim assessment materials when instructed that this is appropriate.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Waikato assessment guidance says students cannot use an AI tool such as ChatGPT to generate or rewrite assignment or test answers and submit them as their own unless assignment instructions specifically permit or require that use; the page states this exception does not apply to Studiosity, which it identifies as an approved AI tool.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Waikato academic-integrity guidance tells students to acknowledge their use of generative AI tools for assessment tasks.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of York student assessment guidance says false authorship is considered an academic misconduct offence under University policy and is treated very seriously.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For taught teaching and assessment, York staff guidance recommends keeping students informed of expectations at module and assessment level.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

USI's general rule permits use of generative AI tools unless a specific activity explicitly prohibits them, and says use must be correctly acknowledged.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

USI student recommendations say students must follow teachers' instructions for GenAI use in written work; complete drafting of exam papers, dissertations, or final papers with GenAI is generally not permitted, and unauthorised use is academic fraud subject to study-regulation penalties.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Verona University's AI guidelines say AI use must be explicitly declared, including the tool used, for exams, research, administrative documents, or other content.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For students, Verona University's AI guidelines say AI may help with studying but may not be used to complete entire exams or theses without explicit instructor authorization.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

VNU-HCM's 2025 research-integrity regulation lists technical tools, including software that assesses text overlap and checks the percentage of AI assistance, as possible ways to detect research-integrity violations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

A 2023 official VNU-HCM research page reports that VNU-HCM held a workshop on undergraduate teaching and assessment in the context of ChatGPT and identified risks including inaccurate information, learner overuse, difficulty detecting machine-written text, and assessment challenges.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

VILNIUS TECH students are not allowed to use AI tools during assessments unless the subject specifically requires AI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

VILNIUS TECH academic staff must inform or remind students about the university AI rules and subject-specific AI use at the beginning of the semester, and must consider AI-use risks when creating assessment tasks.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

VU Amsterdam's framework says the lecturer or examiner indicates in the study guide, syllabus, or Canvas whether and how use of generative AI is allowed for a course, with course learning objectives remaining leading.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

VU Amsterdam's Dutch academic-integrity page states that work made by generative AI is not the student's own work and lists using an AI writer to write an assignment as an example of fraud.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

VUB's research AI guidelines say researchers must provide the greatest possible degree of transparency on AI tool use in scientific activities.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

VUB's 2025-2026 Education and Examination Regulations classify as an irregularity fraud involving statements or texts produced by generative AI applications without reference to original sources.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

VSB-TUO's AI rules list permissible student AI uses such as study inspiration, concept explanation, presentation preparation, stylistic corrections, and data analysis or modelling within projects unless prohibited; they list impermissible uses including automatic thesis writing, generating exam test materials, and creating deepfake or unethical manipulative content.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For teachers, VSB-TUO's AI rules list impermissible uses including automated grading of professional papers, essays, projects, and qualification theses, correcting tests, and entering students' personal data such as names, results, or health status into AI tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Waseda University's university-wide April 2023 statement warns students that submitting a paper created by generative AI as-is is treated as misconduct similar to cheating, and that plagiarism, inappropriate citation, or fabrication in submitted work can expose the student to disciplinary action.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Waseda's official Support Anywhere page describes its student-support chatbot as powered by generative AI and warns that answers can be inferred and may differ from the latest information or facts, so important procedures and policies should be checked against official Support Anywhere pages and the student's school or graduate school.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

WSU Provost guidance expects every instructor to set clear acceptable-AI-use expectations and to state the AI course policy in every class syllabus.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

WSU Provost guidance states that students are expected to provide accurate and transparent attribution of AI use in classroom assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Yeshiva University's undergraduate policy permits faculty to allow Generative AI in courses or assessments if they specify in writing how it may be used; content produced using Generative AI must be cited according to the relevant subject conventions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Yeshiva University's Academic Integrity Resources page says written assessments must be completed from start to finish in Google Docs, with no written work done outside Google Docs, and students must keep related files for the course duration.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Aalto University guidance says teachers who restrict AI use must give clear limitations connected to assessment criteria, and teachers may only require student work to be submitted through systems approved by Aalto University.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ADU's Academic Integrity Policy treats using AI software to support writing without a clear declaration in the student's paper as a plagiarism example.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Adam Mickiewicz University has Rector order 426/2023/2024 setting rules for student use of AI systems in education, including theses and coursework/assessment work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Ahlia University's policy says students may use AI for informal learning and verification of specific information, while text, design, programming, or analysis generated as part of assessment should be the students' original work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

An official ABU conference news page reports a keynote statement that tools like ChatGPT can complete assignments instantly and challenge assessment and originality, but it does not state an ABU rule permitting or prohibiting student AI-tool use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For GenAI use in student learning, University of Bologna guidance says researching/explaining concepts, querying with examples, and summarising books or articles comply with policy principles and generally do not require citation, while students should check generated information, references and sources for accuracy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

American University guidance says students are responsible for course AI policies in syllabi, and misuse of AI or use without permission or disclosure may constitute an Academic Integrity Code violation.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

AUCA's student conduct code states that AI use is addressed in the AUCA AI Policy for plagiarism and lists AI among prohibited resources whose use during a proctored exam constitutes cheating.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.