Bologna, Italy

Alma Mater Studiorum - Università di Bologna

More policy information

Published source-based additions (10)

These tracker summaries are based on retained official-source material. Present applicability has not been independently confirmed. English summaries and original-language quotations are retained unless a checked Chinese summary is available.

Assessment permission

AI-specific provision

Site summary · original evidence below

The policy does not prohibit or monitor GenAI universally, but students must follow course permissions, verify outputs, acknowledge original sources and explain their critical contribution. General encouragement is not unconditional assessment permission.

Scope
Students · university · Teaching/research students and staff; professional staff activity excluded
Recorded topic
Assessment permission
Recorded wording strength
permitted
Original source and archived quotation
Original source and archived quotation ↗
In line with the principles of mutual trust and openness to change, the University considers that the use of GenAI should be permitted and does not adopt measures aimed at prohibiting or monitoring its use, believing that adherence to the values and principles of the Statute, the Code of Ethics and Conduct, and the Regulations on research integrity are sufficient to ensure that every member of the community acts responsibly and consciously in the face of the opportunities and risks of GenAI, thus avoiding improper or harmful uses.

Collected: · Lines: 56–61

Archive hash: eb65d3642d6734a3bff8228bf07cf186a2b5938130e8e389590076afa38b7162

Disclosure

AI-specific provision

Site summary · original evidence below

Substantial GenAI use must be declared, with relevant third-party contractual requirements followed. Substantial/non-substantial distinctions depend on the contribution and discipline: translation or language work can itself be the core disciplinary task.

Scope
Students · university · Teaching/research students and staff; professional staff activity excluded
Recorded topic
Disclosure
Recorded wording strength
mandatory
Original source and archived quotation
Original source and archived quotation ↗
• Declaring when GenAI is being used substantially in research and teaching, and in the exploitation of their results, and, in any case, verifying and adhering to any specific indications on the responsible use of GenAI contained in agreements with third parties such as contracts with publishers, funding bodies, companies, etc.

Collected: · Lines: 208–211

Archive hash: eb65d3642d6734a3bff8228bf07cf186a2b5938130e8e389590076afa38b7162

Privacy and student work

AI-specific provision

Site summary · original evidence below

The policy restricts sharing third-party data without consent or another legal basis, and confidential/unpublished material without the stated confidentiality/non-retraining safeguards. Separately, NDA-protected data must not be uploaded. The stronger NDA prohibition is not weakened to the general safeguards exception.

Scope
Students · university · Teaching/research students and staff; professional staff activity excluded
Recorded topic
Privacy and student work
Recorded wording strength
Prohibited
Original source and archived quotation
Original source and archived quotation ↗
• Refraining from providing online GenAI systems with personal data of third parties, including special categories of data such as health or genetic data, unless the data subject gives his or her consent or another suitable legal basis for the processing exists. • Refraining from uploading confidential information into GenAI systems, including protected or confidential data (other than personal data), information covered by non- disclosure agreements with third parties, business strategy data that are not in the public domain, unless there are assurances that the data will be kept confidential.

Collected: · Lines: 164–171

Archive hash: eb65d3642d6734a3bff8228bf07cf186a2b5938130e8e389590076afa38b7162

AI grading and human oversight

AI-specific provision

Site summary · original evidence below

The policy advises avoiding substantial GenAI use that affects others, including grading and peer review. This is not converted into a ban on every incidental AI-assisted grading activity.

Scope
evaluators · university · Teaching/research students and staff; professional staff activity excluded
Recorded topic
AI grading and human oversight
Recorded wording strength
Recommended
Original source and archived quotation
Original source and archived quotation ↗
• Avoiding substantial use of GenAI tools when this could impact other people or organisations, e.g. for peer review, research project evaluation, student test assessment.

Collected: · Lines: 149–150

Archive hash: eb65d3642d6734a3bff8228bf07cf186a2b5938130e8e389590076afa38b7162

Boundaries and concerns

AI-specific provision

Site summary · original evidence below

Human authors remain responsible for avoiding plagiarism and preserving integrity when using GenAI. The policy does not make permitted AI use itself misconduct or supply an automatic AI-specific punishment.

Scope
Students · university · Teaching/research students and staff; professional staff activity excluded
Recorded topic
Boundaries and concerns
Recorded wording strength
Descriptive statement
Original source and archived quotation
Original source and archived quotation ↗
• Thoroughly checking research products, teaching products and student assessment tests, including dissertations, to make sure that they do not contain plagiarism, especially when GenAI is used substantially to generate, expand or rework content. • Respecting other people’s work and giving them credit for it, since the output of GenAI tools may rely on other people’s results. Each person using GenAI is fully accountable for the accuracy and consistency of the output, as well as liable for any plagiarism.

Collected: · Lines: 183–189

Archive hash: eb65d3642d6734a3bff8228bf07cf186a2b5938130e8e389590076afa38b7162

Investigation and response

General misconduct framework; not automatic consequences of AI use

Site summary · original evidence below

The Rector exercises disciplinary initiative by sending a charge note. University communications must provide reliable evidence of awareness and students use institutional email. The accused has ten days from receipt of the charge note for a written defence and/or request to be heard orally; a trusted person may attend the hearing.

Scope
Students · university · Official landing states effective25April2026; pending old-charge cases retain2019rule · Programme-specific rules/compatibility exceptions apply
Recorded topic
Investigation and response
Recorded wording strength
Descriptive statement
Original source and archived quotation
Original source and archived quotation ↗
Art. 7. Potere di iniziativa 1. Il potere di iniziativa disciplinare è esercitato discrezionalmente dal Rettore nel rispetto delle norme statutarie, inviando nota di contestazione agli studenti interessati. Art. 8. Comunicazioni tra studenti e Ateneo 1. L’Ateneo esegue le comunicazioni previste dal presente Regolamento con modalità telematiche idonee a garantire prova dell’avvenuta conoscenza da parte degli studenti destinatari, oppure con lettera raccomandata con avviso di ricevimento. 2. Gli studenti comunicano con l’Ateneo con la propria mail istituzionale. Art. 9. Diritto di difesa 1. Lo studente incolpato ha diritto ad esercitare le proprie difese nel termine di dieci giorni dal ricevimento della nota di contestazione. 2. Lo studente incolpato può presentare difese scritte e/o chiedere che venga fissata la sua audizione per presentare difese orali. 3. La Commissione Disciplinare Studenti fissa giorno e ora in cui procedere all’audizione innanzi a sé, con l’avviso che la mancata presentazione dello studente alla data indicata lo farà decadere dal diritto di essere ascoltato a propria difesa. Lo studente che dimostra di non aver potuto partecipare all’audizione per causa a lui non imputabile può chiedere venga fissata altra seduta allo scopo. 4. All’audizione può presenziare insieme allo studente una persona di sua fiducia.

Collected: · Lines: 135–154

Archive hash: 245781b777d84613688333b517cef4960d73bd387a53d6ac46921163a956d477

General misconduct framework; not automatic consequences of AI use

Site summary · original evidence below

The Committee imposes sanctions other than university suspension; for suspension it submits a proposal to the Academic Senate, which can adopt or vary it with reasons. Committee members do not vote in that Senate decision. The actor distinction is retained.

Scope
Students · university · Official landing states effective25April2026; pending old-charge cases retain2019rule · Programme-specific rules/compatibility exceptions apply
Recorded topic
Investigation and response
Recorded wording strength
Descriptive statement
Original source and archived quotation
Original source and archived quotation ↗
Art. 12. Decisione del procedimento disciplinare 1. La Commissione Disciplinare Studenti, dato seguito all’eventuale audizione delle persone incolpate, esamina l’intera istruttoria eseguita ed emette direttamente il provvedimento disciplinare in calce al verbale della seduta, tutte le volte in cui ritiene applicarsi una sanzione diversa dalla sospensione. 2. Se la Commissione Disciplinare Studenti ritiene doversi emettere un provvedimento di sospensione, avanza questa proposta al Senato Accademico alla prima seduta utile, che può farlo proprio oppure discostarsene motivatamente. I membri della Commissione Disciplinare Studenti non possono partecipare alla votazione del Senato Accademico sulla proposta di sanzione formulata e non vengono conteggiati nel quorum costitutivo e deliberativo del Senato medesimo. 3. L’applicazione dei provvedimenti disciplinari deve rispondere a criteri di ragionevolezza ed equità, avuto riguardo alla natura della violazione, allo svolgimento dei fatti e alla valutazione degli elementi di prova, alla durata del corso, nonché all’irrogazione di precedenti sanzioni disciplinari, anche relative a pregresse carriere attivate nell’Ateneo da parte del medesimo studente.

Collected: · Lines: 201–213

Archive hash: 245781b777d84613688333b517cef4960d73bd387a53d6ac46921163a956d477

General misconduct framework; not automatic consequences of AI use

Site summary · original evidence below

The proceeding must end within180 days from the disciplinary charge; the rule is expressly peremptory. The stated Rector-ordered suspension for serious reasons connected with court proceedings interrupts the running period. This is a case-processing limit, not a student appeal deadline.

Scope
Students · university · Official landing states effective25April2026; pending old-charge cases retain2019rule · Programme-specific rules/compatibility exceptions apply
Recorded topic
Investigation and response
Recorded wording strength
Descriptive statement
Original source and archived quotation
Original source and archived quotation ↗
4. In ogni caso, la decisione del procedimento disciplinare deve avvenire nel termine perentorio di centottanta giorni dalla contestazione disciplinare.

Collected: · Lines: 224–225

Archive hash: 245781b777d84613688333b517cef4960d73bd387a53d6ac46921163a956d477

General misconduct framework; not automatic consequences of AI use

Site summary · original evidence below

The2026 regulation repeals the2019 regulation, but proceedings with a charge note already signed on the effective date continue under the old regulation. New tariff and procedure are not automatically applied to all pending earlier cases.

Scope
Students · university · Official landing states effective25April2026; pending old-charge cases retain2019rule · Programme-specific rules/compatibility exceptions apply
Recorded topic
Investigation and response
Recorded wording strength
Descriptive statement
Original source and archived quotation
Original source and archived quotation ↗
Art. 24. Entrata in vigore 1. Il presente Regolamento entra in vigore nel termine indicato dal Decreto Rettorale di emanazione. Art. 25. Effetti dell’entrata in vigore 1. Con l’entrata in vigore del presente regolamento viene abrogato il Regolamento per i Procedimenti Disciplinari degli Studenti emanato con D.R. n. 1918 del 09/10/2019 e ss.mm.. 2. I procedimenti disciplinari avviati in vigenza del Regolamento emanato con D.R. n. 1918 del 09/10/2019 e ss.mm. continuano ad essere disciplinati da questa disciplina fino alla loro naturale conclusione. 3. Si considerano avviati in vigenza del Regolamento emanato con D.R. n. 1918 del 09/10/2019 e ss.mm. tutti i procedimenti in cui la nota di contestazione risulta firmata alla data di entrata in vigore del presente testo normativo.

Collected: · Lines: 308–318

Archive hash: 245781b777d84613688333b517cef4960d73bd387a53d6ac46921163a956d477

Possible outcomes

General misconduct framework; not automatic consequences of AI use

Site summary · original evidence below

Available sanctions range from admonition to examination exclusion for one day–three months, exclusion from specified courses/exams for three months and one day–six months, and university suspension for six months and one day–twelve months. They operate when made known; this generic tariff is not an automatic AI sanction.

Scope
Students · university · Official landing states effective25April2026; pending old-charge cases retain2019rule · Programme-specific rules/compatibility exceptions apply
Recorded topic
Possible outcomes
Recorded wording strength
possible
Original source and archived quotation
Original source and archived quotation ↗
Art. 17. Ammonizione 1. L’ammonizione consiste in una nota di biasimo indirizzata allo studente che ha commesso la violazione. Art. 18. Esclusione temporanea da uno o più esami 1. L’esclusione da uno o più esami può avere una durata minima di un giorno e una durata massima di tre mesi. 2. Lo studente escluso da uno o più esami non può iscriversi né sostenere esami di profitto o la prova finale per il periodo stabilito nel provvedimento sanzionatorio. Art. 19. Interdizione da uno o più insegnamenti e dai relativi esami 1. L’interdizione da uno o più insegnamenti ha una durata minima di tre mesi e un giorno ed una durata massima di sei mesi. 5 Alma Mater Studiorum - Università di Bologna NormAteneo - Sito di documentazione sulla normativa d’Ateneo vigente presso l’Università di Bologna – 2. Lo studente interdetto non può partecipare alle attività di didattiche di uno o più insegnamenti specifici, né sostenere esami di profitto o la prova finale per il periodo stabilito nel provvedimento sanzionatorio. Art. 20. Sospensione temporanea dall’Ateneo 1. La sospensione temporanea dall’Ateneo ha una durata minima di sei mesi e un giorno e una durata massima di dodici mesi. 2. Nel periodo di sospensione lo studente non può compiere atti di carriera, partecipare ad attività didattiche o sostenere esami di profitto o la prova finale. Art. 21. Efficacia della sanzione 1. Tutte le sanzioni acquistano efficacia dal momento in cui sono rese note al loro destinatario.

Collected: · Lines: 259–290

Archive hash: 245781b777d84613688333b517cef4960d73bd387a53d6ac46921163a956d477

Reviewed record

Reviewed claims

7 reviewed claims

Privacy

University of Bologna community members covered by the teaching and research GenAI policy are responsible for not entering third-party personal data or confidential/protected information into online GenAI systems unless an appropriate legal basis, consent, or confidentiality assurance exists.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence94%

Normalized value: Personal data and confidential information restricted in online GenAI systems

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Refraining from providing online GenAI systems with personal data of third parties, including special categories of data such as health or genetic data, unless the data subject gives his or her consent or another suitable legal basis for the processing exists. Refraining from uploading confidential information into GenAI systems, including protected or confidential data

Ai Tool Treatment

The University of Bologna policy treats GenAI as permitted support for teaching, learning, research and knowledge valorisation, while stating that GenAI should serve people and not replace creative and intellectual activity.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence93%

Normalized value: GenAI permitted as responsible support, not replacement

Original evidence

Evidence 1
The Policy guidelines aim to ensure that GenAI is used in a responsible and conscious way; to help improve the quality of teaching, learning and research also in collaborations with society and businesses; at the service of the people and not to replace their creative and intellectual activity.

Academic Integrity

University of Bologna citation guidance says substantial GenAI contributions in teaching and research should be acknowledged and declared, with the statement identifying tools or models, date or period of use, modes of use, and where the tool was used.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence92%

Normalized value: Substantial GenAI use should be declared with tool, timing, use mode, and location details

Original evidence

Evidence 1
it is crucial that each and every contribution deriving from substantial use of GenAI is acknowledged and declared... a complete GenAI statement should include the GenAI tools or models used and their version, the date or period of use, specific modes of use, and specific chapters, sections or subsections where the tool was used.

Ai Tool Treatment

The University of Bologna policy says it considers GenAI use permitted and does not adopt measures aimed at prohibiting or monitoring its use, relying on existing university values and regulations for responsible conduct.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence91%

Normalized value: No general prohibition or monitoring measure stated in policy

Original evidence

Evidence 1
the University considers that the use of GenAI should be permitted and does not adopt measures aimed at prohibiting or monitoring its use, believing that adherence to the values and principles of the Statute, the Code of Ethics and Conduct, and the Regulations on research integrity are sufficient

Academic Integrity

Under the University of Bologna GenAI policy, students are responsible for checking permitted uses, following teaching staff instructions, verifying GenAI output, acknowledging original sources, and being able to explain work produced with GenAI support.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence90%

Normalized value: Students responsible for permitted-use checks, verification, source acknowledgement, and explanation

Original evidence

Evidence 1
The responsibilities of students include checking the permitted uses of GenAI and using GenAI as instructed by the teaching staff and teaching assistants... using GenAI output only after checking its content and provided that the original source is acknowledged... being able to illustrate their work generated with the support of GenAI

Teaching

For GenAI use in assessed student work such as dissertation structure, dissertation writing, or programming code, University of Bologna guidance says the uses comply with policy principles only with active supervision, critical thinking, accountability for results, citation where required, and checking with the teacher whether the use is permitted.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence89%

Normalized value: Assessed-work GenAI use conditioned on supervision, accountability, citation, and teacher permission checks

Original evidence

Evidence 1
It complies with the University Policy principles, provided you implement active supervision and critical thinking and are able to account for the generated results. It requires citing the use of GenAI. It is recommended that you check with your teacher whether this use case is permitted and follow their instructions.

Teaching

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.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence86%

Normalized value: Learning uses comply with policy principles with source and accuracy checks

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Researching and explaining concepts, theories, topics. It complies with the University Policy principles. It does not require citing the use of GenAI. Check the generated information for accuracy. Closely check all references to cited sources. Check the output relating to non-established knowledge for reliability. Check the sources used for accuracy also by means of specialist search engines.

Source record

Official sources

4 sources

Record information, JSON & citation
Reviewagent reviewedConfidence94%Snapshot statusNot publishedJSONPublic JSON

Citation: University AI Policy Tracker. "Alma Mater Studiorum - Università di Bologna AI Policy Tracker record." Last checked May 14, 2026. https://eduaipolicy.org/universities/alma-mater-studiorum-universita-di-bologna

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

Open change log