University AI Policy Tracker
APIGitHub
Language
ENZHFRPLESNLMSJAKOPTARRUDEITCSTRFISVDANBHULTIDVITHFAHEHIURBNUKELZH-HANT

Durham, United Kingdom Last checked

Durham University

Independent · Open access · Not an official university page

What would you like to check?

Search universities
Can I use AI for my coursework?Check the applicable scopeDo I need to disclose AI use?Check the applicable scopeCan I upload sensitive data?Check the applicable scopeWhich tools can I access?Check the applicable scope
Use in ChatGPT ↗Before you submitAdvice and precautionsRecord updates ↓

Explore the current record by topic

Coursework

Check the applicable scope

Assessment permission depends on the specific assessment category.

Official source ↗

Exams

Check the applicable scope

Some viva-style assessments may be classified No GenAI Allowed; individual exam instructions not retrieved.

Official source ↗

AI disclosure

Check the applicable scope

Common Awards declaration text is only historically recorded; university-wide disclosure format remains unverified.

Privacy & data

Check the applicable scope

Teaching staff must comply with GDPR; no institutional retention or data-transfer schedule verified.

Official source ↗

Approved tools

Check the applicable scope

No named institutionally licensed AI tool verified. Four assessment categories are not tool endorsements.

Official source ↗

Research & publication

Check the applicable scope

A postgraduate research AI policy was approved, but its operative text and thesis rules are unavailable.

Official source ↗
More reviewed record topics

Academic integrity

Check the applicable scope

General regulations provide appeals and meeting rights; AI-specific misconduct decision process not verified.

Official source ↗

Teaching guidance

Check the applicable scope

DCAD recommends reviewing marking criteria and discussing AI in assessment briefs.

Official source ↗

Security & procurement

Check the applicable scope

No official procurement, vendor security or AI tool approval workflow retrieved.

Before you submit

Do

  • Check the assessment-specific GenAI category before using AI.
    Site advice
  • Where assessment instructions specify Selective use, stay within the stated use.
    Requirement in this scope

Don’t

  • Do not interpret an Allowed designation on one assessment as blanket permission elsewhere.
    Site advice
AI use questioned?Investigation, possible outcomes and appeal

AI use questioned?

Durham University

Senate-updated GenAI assessment policy (June 2026) sets assessment-specific categories (Not Permitted, Selective, Allowed); an Allowed designation on one task never applies elsewhere, and stale internal DCAD listing claims are retained as historical only.

Investigation & response

Students have the right to be accompanied in meetings conducted under General Regulation IV, and academic misconduct determinations apply the balance-of-probabilities standard.

Original evidence and scope

Students have the right to be accompanied in meetings conducted under General Regulation IV, and academic misconduct determinations apply the balance-of-probabilities standard.

academic_integrity:draft-procedure-1

General Regulation IV meeting rights and balance-of-probabilities standard; General Regulation VII academic appeals: 21 days from the date of notification of the decision to be appealed, and 14 days from the date of notification of the Faculty Appeal decision for SAAC. The excerpts do not establish calendar versus working days.

In any meeting with University staff under this regulation, students have the right to be accompanied.

General Regulation IV; SHA-256 identifies this retained UTF-8 excerpt, not raw HTML/PDF; physical page and original offsets unavailable.

Official university source ↗
In all cases considered under this regulation, an allegation of misconduct will be assessed on the balance of probabilities.

General Regulation IV; SHA-256 identifies this retained UTF-8 excerpt, not raw HTML/PDF; physical page and original offsets unavailable.

Official university source ↗

Possible outcomes

The current evidence does not include a verified specific procedure or deadline. Check the applicable university rules.

Review & appeal

A student must appeal within 21 days of the date of the notification of the decision to be appealed

Original evidence and scope

A student must appeal within 21 days of the date of the notification of the decision to be appealed

academic_integrity:d13

General Regulation IV meeting rights and balance-of-probabilities standard; General Regulation VII academic appeals: 21 days from the date of notification of the decision to be appealed, and 14 days from the date of notification of the Faculty Appeal decision for SAAC. The excerpts do not establish calendar versus working days.

A student must appeal within 21 days of the date of the notification of the decision to be appealed

General Regulation VII 7.1; SHA-256 identifies this retained UTF-8 excerpt, not raw HTML/PDF; physical page and original offsets unavailable.

Official university source ↗

An appeal to the Senate Academic Appeals Committee (SAAC) must be made within 14 days of the date of the notification of the Faculty Appeal decision

Original evidence and scope

An appeal to the Senate Academic Appeals Committee (SAAC) must be made within 14 days of the date of the notification of the Faculty Appeal decision

academic_integrity:d14

General Regulation IV meeting rights and balance-of-probabilities standard; General Regulation VII academic appeals: 21 days from the date of notification of the decision to be appealed, and 14 days from the date of notification of the Faculty Appeal decision for SAAC. The excerpts do not establish calendar versus working days.

An appeal to the Senate Academic Appeals Committee (SAAC) must be made within 14 days of the date of the notification of the Faculty Appeal decision

General Regulation VII 8.1; SHA-256 identifies this retained UTF-8 excerpt, not raw HTML/PDF; physical page and original offsets unavailable.

Official university source ↗

Tool discovery records: scope pending review

Tool discovery information and cited sources are retained. Current account eligibility, cost, endorsement and assessment permission are not confirmed.

AI tools

Record updatesLast 90 days · Recorded updates: 2

Updates to this site's reviewed record, not confirmation that the university changed its policy.

  1. Page update

    Other records · Page update

    View revision

    Loading revision…

  2. Record maintenance

    Other records · Record maintenance

    View revision

    Loading revision…

Reviewed claims

6

Historical and pending public Claims (10)

These original public records and sources remain traceable. They are excluded from current topics, FAQ, submission and Analysis conclusions and do not establish current permission.

claim-du-common-awards-no-substantive-ai · excluded_pending_review

Common Awards summative

Original canonical claim retained in public record but excluded from strong conclusions (UNVERIFIED: MCP历史证据片段存在，但本次未取得该官网原文，不能独立认定为现行。).

Record history

claim-du-common-awards-scope · excluded_pending_review

Common Awards summative

Original canonical claim retained in public record but excluded from strong conclusions (UNVERIFIED: MCP历史证据片段存在，但本次未取得该官网原文，不能独立认定为现行。).

Record history

claim-du-common-awards-no-third-party-material · excluded_pending_review

Common Awards summative

Original canonical claim retained in public record but excluded from strong conclusions (UNVERIFIED: MCP历史证据片段存在，但本次未取得该官网原文，不能独立认定为现行。).

Record history

claim-du-common-awards-ai-declaration · excluded_pending_review

Common Awards summative

Original canonical claim retained in public record but excluded from strong conclusions (UNVERIFIED: MCP历史证据片段存在，但本次未取得该官网原文，不能独立认定为现行。).

Record history

claim-du-go-ai-unadvisable · excluded_pending_review

Global Opportunities applications

Original canonical claim retained in public record but excluded from strong conclusions (UNVERIFIED: MCP历史证据片段存在，但本次未取得该官网原文，不能独立认定为现行。).

Record history

claim-du-common-awards-limited-uses-not-misconduct · excluded_pending_review

Common Awards summative

Original canonical claim retained in public record but excluded from strong conclusions (UNVERIFIED: MCP历史证据片段存在，但本次未取得该官网原文，不能独立认定为现行。).

Record history

claim-du-go-proofreading-appropriate · excluded_pending_review

Global Opportunities applications

Original canonical claim retained in public record but excluded from strong conclusions (UNVERIFIED: MCP历史证据片段存在，但本次未取得该官网原文，不能独立认定为现行。).

Record history

claim-du-dcad-internal-institutional-policy-listed · historical_only

Durham University programmes / assessments

Retained in historical record only; superseded or internal-listing claim not used as current policy.

Record history

claim-du-genai-programme-mix-requirement · excluded_pending_review

Durham University programmes / assessments

Original canonical claim retained in public record but excluded from strong conclusions (OVERSTATED: 官网现在时为正在更新，原主张将进度性描述提升为已确定强制义务。).

Record history

claim-du-genai-staff-transparency-teaching · excluded_pending_review

teaching staff

Original canonical claim retained in public record but excluded from strong conclusions (VERIFIED: 本次独立官方网页文字支持该陈述；限于所列范围，非正式政策全文。).

Record history

Official sources

4 official URLs; 5 source attributions and their captured versions retained.

Academic Misconduct: AI Policy and Guidance

www.durham.ac.uk

University official source

durham.ac.uk

Hash and captured version

Academic Misconduct: AI Policy and Guidance · 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

6bd5492147814398f3b03f2c6582dec73f9e4fcc5f8c2d65bc374eb8a2489432

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

AI Guidance

www.durham.ac.uk

University official source

durham.ac.uk

Hash and captured version

AI Guidance · 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

ba5fed62f973242d6badd63c3179a12ddf500109aa5f7ecc8c5e234c7fb5b787

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Assessment and marking in light of generative AI

dcad-resourcebank.webspace.durham.ac.uk

University official source

dcad-resourcebank.webspace.durham.ac.uk

Hash and captured version

Assessment and marking in light of generative AI · 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

1389b66974862e4fff2fea15285fd78f4603e27555e1ee323e9b762ed57e3301

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Generative AI in Learning, Teaching & Assessment

dcad-resourcebank.webspace.durham.ac.uk

University official source

dcad-resourcebank.webspace.durham.ac.uk

Hash and captured version

Generative AI in Learning, Teaching & Assessment · 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

221e2a570ee0f05193c1c10adf79de564f2d41ecbc1b47022911bc621811ff5b

Generative AI in Learning, Teaching & Assessment at Durham University · 2026-07-07T13:18:52.000Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

f14baa18ffb070e305ae8913e36f815afde6b9f0c16744a11e61d0f925581531

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗
Record information, JSON & citation

Review layers: claim review applies to the claims only. Analysis is a separate machine-generated summary awaiting review. Coverage scores do not establish complete policy knowledge.

Claim review state
agent_reviewed
Analysis review state
machine_candidate
Record revision
qs91-100-v6-presentation-r1-20261026
Dataset release
public-release-20260924-002
Correction published
Student snapshot
Not published
Current reviewed JSON · All record history

Published V6 presentation; JSON and MCP retain the existing public record. Supplementary quotations and scope notes remain pending review. Local candidate corrections, tools and student summaries are not approved for publication. Institution-wide audit remains PARTIAL.

  • This tracker is not legal advice, not academic integrity advice, and not an official university statement unless a linked source is the university's own official page.
  • Full raw HTML/PDF source bytes were not closed-loop archived in the research package; SHA-256 hashes on topic excerpts identify UTF-8 excerpt text only.
        Current reviewed JSON
        Questions students ask

        Questions students ask

        Can I use AI for my coursework?

        Assessment permission depends on the specific assessment category.

        View evidence →
        Do I need to disclose AI use?

        Common Awards declaration text is only historically recorded; university-wide disclosure format remains unverified.

        View evidence →
        Can I upload sensitive data?

        Teaching staff must comply with GDPR; no institutional retention or data-transfer schedule verified.

        View evidence →
        Which tools can I access?

        No named institutionally licensed AI tool verified. Four assessment categories are not tool endorsements.

        View evidence →
        What are the examination rules?

        Some viva-style assessments may be classified No GenAI Allowed; individual exam instructions not retrieved.

        View evidence →
        What rules apply to research and publication?

        A postgraduate research AI policy was approved, but its operative text and thesis rules are unavailable.

        View evidence →
        What counts as academic misconduct?

        General regulations provide appeals and meeting rights; AI-specific misconduct decision process not verified.

        View evidence →
        What guidance applies to teaching?

        DCAD recommends reviewing marking criteria and discussing AI in assessment briefs.

        View evidence →
        What security and procurement requirements apply?

        No official procurement, vendor security or AI tool approval workflow retrieved.

        View evidence →
        When was this record checked?

        Record checked:

        Record version →
        Which official sources support these rules?Official source →
        Where can I read the full evidence?

        16 · Full policy evidence

        Full policy evidence →