King's College London

King's College London suggests four broad levels of generative AI use in assessment that programme and module leaders may adjust to each assessment: Minimal (routine tools such as auto transcription, spell and grammar checkers), Limited/selective (clearly delineated tasks as allowed), Open (no specific restrictions but key stages and tools must be tracked) and Embedded (AI use is a focal part of the assessment). The levels are a framework for the actual assessment brief, not an automatic university-wide permission, and verbatim use of generated content without acknowledgement is never appropriate.

CL-011

What constitutes appropriate use?; lines 260-260 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London suggests four broad levels of generative AI use in assessment that programme and module leaders may adjust to each assessment: Minimal (routine tools such as auto transcription, spell and grammar checkers), Limited/selective (clearly delineated tasks as allowed), Open (no specific restrictions but key stages and tools must be tracked) and Embedded (AI use is a focal part of the assessment). The levels are a framework for the actual assessment brief, not an automatic university-wide permission, and verbatim use of generated content without acknowledgement is never appropriate.

CL-011

1. Minimal; lines 264-264 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London suggests four broad levels of generative AI use in assessment that programme and module leaders may adjust to each assessment: Minimal (routine tools such as auto transcription, spell and grammar checkers), Limited/selective (clearly delineated tasks as allowed), Open (no specific restrictions but key stages and tools must be tracked) and Embedded (AI use is a focal part of the assessment). The levels are a framework for the actual assessment brief, not an automatic university-wide permission, and verbatim use of generated content without acknowledgement is never appropriate.

CL-011

2. Limited/selective; lines 268-268 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London suggests four broad levels of generative AI use in assessment that programme and module leaders may adjust to each assessment: Minimal (routine tools such as auto transcription, spell and grammar checkers), Limited/selective (clearly delineated tasks as allowed), Open (no specific restrictions but key stages and tools must be tracked) and Embedded (AI use is a focal part of the assessment). The levels are a framework for the actual assessment brief, not an automatic university-wide permission, and verbatim use of generated content without acknowledgement is never appropriate.

CL-011

3. Open; lines 284-284 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London suggests four broad levels of generative AI use in assessment that programme and module leaders may adjust to each assessment: Minimal (routine tools such as auto transcription, spell and grammar checkers), Limited/selective (clearly delineated tasks as allowed), Open (no specific restrictions but key stages and tools must be tracked) and Embedded (AI use is a focal part of the assessment). The levels are a framework for the actual assessment brief, not an automatic university-wide permission, and verbatim use of generated content without acknowledgement is never appropriate.

CL-011

4. Embedded; lines 296-296 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London suggests four broad levels of generative AI use in assessment that programme and module leaders may adjust to each assessment: Minimal (routine tools such as auto transcription, spell and grammar checkers), Limited/selective (clearly delineated tasks as allowed), Open (no specific restrictions but key stages and tools must be tracked) and Embedded (AI use is a focal part of the assessment). The levels are a framework for the actual assessment brief, not an automatic university-wide permission, and verbatim use of generated content without acknowledgement is never appropriate.

CL-011

What constitutes appropriate use?; lines 304-304 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London does not ban the use of generative AI by students. Whether and how AI may be used in a given assessment is set by the assessment guidance: students should be given clear guidance on the level of AI that is appropriate and should ask if uncertain.

CL-001

Is generative AI banned at King's?; lines 194-194 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London does not ban the use of generative AI by students. Whether and how AI may be used in a given assessment is set by the assessment guidance: students should be given clear guidance on the level of AI that is appropriate and should ask if uncertain.

CL-001

What constitutes appropriate use?; lines 260-260 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's Academic Misconduct Policy states that using generative AI tools to produce output that is then copied as part of a submission is not appropriate, that any work submitted must genuinely demonstrate the student's own work, skills and knowledge and follow the assessment guidelines, and that generative AI writing programmes are third-party technologies to be used only in accordance with College guidance. The King's guidance adds that submitting AI-generated text as one's own without written departmental permission is considered misconduct (third-party involvement or text manipulation) where it gives undue advantage or interferes with assessment of the student's own understanding. A written permission or acknowledgement does not by itself make substantive AI content creation acceptable.

CL-004

Academic Misconduct Policy s4.2; physical PDF page 4; lines 172-174 of captured PDF text

d1df4e2341fad7ce1946ea3740e43ac5e5149ec5e96ba787c32689580679152c

King's Academic Misconduct Policy states that using generative AI tools to produce output that is then copied as part of a submission is not appropriate, that any work submitted must genuinely demonstrate the student's own work, skills and knowledge and follow the assessment guidelines, and that generative AI writing programmes are third-party technologies to be used only in accordance with College guidance. The King's guidance adds that submitting AI-generated text as one's own without written departmental permission is considered misconduct (third-party involvement or text manipulation) where it gives undue advantage or interferes with assessment of the student's own understanding. A written permission or acknowledgement does not by itself make substantive AI content creation acceptable.

CL-004

Academic Misconduct Policy s4.2; physical PDF page 4; lines 176-179 of captured PDF text

d1df4e2341fad7ce1946ea3740e43ac5e5149ec5e96ba787c32689580679152c

King's Academic Misconduct Policy states that using generative AI tools to produce output that is then copied as part of a submission is not appropriate, that any work submitted must genuinely demonstrate the student's own work, skills and knowledge and follow the assessment guidelines, and that generative AI writing programmes are third-party technologies to be used only in accordance with College guidance. The King's guidance adds that submitting AI-generated text as one's own without written departmental permission is considered misconduct (third-party involvement or text manipulation) where it gives undue advantage or interferes with assessment of the student's own understanding. A written permission or acknowledgement does not by itself make substantive AI content creation acceptable.

CL-004

Academic Misconduct Policy s4.3; physical PDF page 4; lines 185-187 of captured PDF text

d1df4e2341fad7ce1946ea3740e43ac5e5149ec5e96ba787c32689580679152c

King's Academic Misconduct Policy states that using generative AI tools to produce output that is then copied as part of a submission is not appropriate, that any work submitted must genuinely demonstrate the student's own work, skills and knowledge and follow the assessment guidelines, and that generative AI writing programmes are third-party technologies to be used only in accordance with College guidance. The King's guidance adds that submitting AI-generated text as one's own without written departmental permission is considered misconduct (third-party involvement or text manipulation) where it gives undue advantage or interferes with assessment of the student's own understanding. A written permission or acknowledgement does not by itself make substantive AI content creation acceptable.

CL-004

Academic Misconduct Policy s4.5; physical PDF page 4; lines 197-199 of captured PDF text

d1df4e2341fad7ce1946ea3740e43ac5e5149ec5e96ba787c32689580679152c

King's Academic Misconduct Policy states that using generative AI tools to produce output that is then copied as part of a submission is not appropriate, that any work submitted must genuinely demonstrate the student's own work, skills and knowledge and follow the assessment guidelines, and that generative AI writing programmes are third-party technologies to be used only in accordance with College guidance. The King's guidance adds that submitting AI-generated text as one's own without written departmental permission is considered misconduct (third-party involvement or text manipulation) where it gives undue advantage or interferes with assessment of the student's own understanding. A written permission or acknowledgement does not by itself make substantive AI content creation acceptable.

CL-004

Guidance on academic integrity, attribution, detection; lines 204-204 of captured page text

1e3ca992756b189957a27399a52e9201c612cbba5426b6ceb89b212e9bb41682

King's College London suggests four broad levels of generative AI use in assessment that programme and module leaders may adjust to each assessment: Minimal (routine tools such as auto transcription, spell and grammar checkers), Limited/selective (clearly delineated tasks as allowed), Open (no specific restrictions but key stages and tools must be tracked) and Embedded (AI use is a focal part of the assessment). The levels are a framework for the actual assessment brief, not an automatic university-wide permission, and verbatim use of generated content without acknowledgement is never appropriate.

CL-011

What constitutes appropriate use?; lines 260-260 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London suggests four broad levels of generative AI use in assessment that programme and module leaders may adjust to each assessment: Minimal (routine tools such as auto transcription, spell and grammar checkers), Limited/selective (clearly delineated tasks as allowed), Open (no specific restrictions but key stages and tools must be tracked) and Embedded (AI use is a focal part of the assessment). The levels are a framework for the actual assessment brief, not an automatic university-wide permission, and verbatim use of generated content without acknowledgement is never appropriate.

CL-011

1. Minimal; lines 264-264 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London suggests four broad levels of generative AI use in assessment that programme and module leaders may adjust to each assessment: Minimal (routine tools such as auto transcription, spell and grammar checkers), Limited/selective (clearly delineated tasks as allowed), Open (no specific restrictions but key stages and tools must be tracked) and Embedded (AI use is a focal part of the assessment). The levels are a framework for the actual assessment brief, not an automatic university-wide permission, and verbatim use of generated content without acknowledgement is never appropriate.

CL-011

2. Limited/selective; lines 268-268 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London suggests four broad levels of generative AI use in assessment that programme and module leaders may adjust to each assessment: Minimal (routine tools such as auto transcription, spell and grammar checkers), Limited/selective (clearly delineated tasks as allowed), Open (no specific restrictions but key stages and tools must be tracked) and Embedded (AI use is a focal part of the assessment). The levels are a framework for the actual assessment brief, not an automatic university-wide permission, and verbatim use of generated content without acknowledgement is never appropriate.

CL-011

3. Open; lines 284-284 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London suggests four broad levels of generative AI use in assessment that programme and module leaders may adjust to each assessment: Minimal (routine tools such as auto transcription, spell and grammar checkers), Limited/selective (clearly delineated tasks as allowed), Open (no specific restrictions but key stages and tools must be tracked) and Embedded (AI use is a focal part of the assessment). The levels are a framework for the actual assessment brief, not an automatic university-wide permission, and verbatim use of generated content without acknowledgement is never appropriate.

CL-011

4. Embedded; lines 296-296 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London suggests four broad levels of generative AI use in assessment that programme and module leaders may adjust to each assessment: Minimal (routine tools such as auto transcription, spell and grammar checkers), Limited/selective (clearly delineated tasks as allowed), Open (no specific restrictions but key stages and tools must be tracked) and Embedded (AI use is a focal part of the assessment). The levels are a framework for the actual assessment brief, not an automatic university-wide permission, and verbatim use of generated content without acknowledgement is never appropriate.

CL-011

What constitutes appropriate use?; lines 304-304 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London does not require students to cite generative AI as an authoritative source in the reference list, but it requires students to acknowledge any use of generative AI tools in coursework by including a declaration statement with their references. Unless the assessment brief gives other wording, students append either a declaration that no part of the submission was generated by AI software (English grammar and spell checking is consistent with this statement) or a declaration that parts of the submission have AI contributions within the acceptable use specified in the brief, naming the tools and how they were used.

CL-003

How do I acknowledge use of generative AI?; lines 320-320 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London does not require students to cite generative AI as an authoritative source in the reference list, but it requires students to acknowledge any use of generative AI tools in coursework by including a declaration statement with their references. Unless the assessment brief gives other wording, students append either a declaration that no part of the submission was generated by AI software (English grammar and spell checking is consistent with this statement) or a declaration that parts of the submission have AI contributions within the acceptable use specified in the brief, naming the tools and how they were used.

CL-003

How do I acknowledge use of generative AI?; lines 324-324 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London does not require students to cite generative AI as an authoritative source in the reference list, but it requires students to acknowledge any use of generative AI tools in coursework by including a declaration statement with their references. Unless the assessment brief gives other wording, students append either a declaration that no part of the submission was generated by AI software (English grammar and spell checking is consistent with this statement) or a declaration that parts of the submission have AI contributions within the acceptable use specified in the brief, naming the tools and how they were used.

CL-003

Declaration statement 1; lines 326-328 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London does not require students to cite generative AI as an authoritative source in the reference list, but it requires students to acknowledge any use of generative AI tools in coursework by including a declaration statement with their references. Unless the assessment brief gives other wording, students append either a declaration that no part of the submission was generated by AI software (English grammar and spell checking is consistent with this statement) or a declaration that parts of the submission have AI contributions within the acceptable use specified in the brief, naming the tools and how they were used.

CL-003

Declaration statement 2; lines 332-332 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

When King's postgraduate research students submit a thesis, they must also submit the Thesis Submission Declaration Form (RD2), signed by the student and supervisors, and select one of two AI declarations: that no part of the thesis was generated by AI software (grammar and spell checking is consistent with this), or that AI software was used to rewrite, rephrase or paraphrase parts of the thesis to ensure the quality of the English, naming the tools used. Both declarations describe permitted approaches.

draft-claim-kcl-doctoral-rd2-declaration

Thesis Submission Declaration Form (RD2); lines 282-282 of captured page text

1b5648a579910bcd366eaec85b06b0205a5991befd431a0fb3a6ff761a940b3c

When King's postgraduate research students submit a thesis, they must also submit the Thesis Submission Declaration Form (RD2), signed by the student and supervisors, and select one of two AI declarations: that no part of the thesis was generated by AI software (grammar and spell checking is consistent with this), or that AI software was used to rewrite, rephrase or paraphrase parts of the thesis to ensure the quality of the English, naming the tools used. Both declarations describe permitted approaches.

draft-claim-kcl-doctoral-rd2-declaration

RD2 declaration 1; lines 286-286 of captured page text

1b5648a579910bcd366eaec85b06b0205a5991befd431a0fb3a6ff761a940b3c

When King's postgraduate research students submit a thesis, they must also submit the Thesis Submission Declaration Form (RD2), signed by the student and supervisors, and select one of two AI declarations: that no part of the thesis was generated by AI software (grammar and spell checking is consistent with this), or that AI software was used to rewrite, rephrase or paraphrase parts of the thesis to ensure the quality of the English, naming the tools used. Both declarations describe permitted approaches.

draft-claim-kcl-doctoral-rd2-declaration

RD2 declaration 2; lines 292-292 of captured page text

1b5648a579910bcd366eaec85b06b0205a5991befd431a0fb3a6ff761a940b3c

When King's postgraduate research students submit a thesis, they must also submit the Thesis Submission Declaration Form (RD2), signed by the student and supervisors, and select one of two AI declarations: that no part of the thesis was generated by AI software (grammar and spell checking is consistent with this), or that AI software was used to rewrite, rephrase or paraphrase parts of the thesis to ensure the quality of the English, naming the tools used. Both declarations describe permitted approaches.

draft-claim-kcl-doctoral-rd2-declaration

RD2; lines 296-296 of captured page text

1b5648a579910bcd366eaec85b06b0205a5991befd431a0fb3a6ff761a940b3c

King's College London states that its Enterprise licence means Copilot use comes with commercial data protection, making it a more secure alternative to other generative AI tools. Commercial data protection does not mean any data may be entered: King's student guidance says not to input personal data, sensitive information or content created by others into any AI platform.

CL-007

Equity of access; lines 214-214 of captured page text

ca24453f069fb2243629bd6e43c2cb5aa57a2fef0ad4721d11d3ee57e6855bb1

King's College London states that its Enterprise licence means Copilot use comes with commercial data protection, making it a more secure alternative to other generative AI tools. Commercial data protection does not mean any data may be entered: King's student guidance says not to input personal data, sensitive information or content created by others into any AI platform.

CL-007

What should I avoid?; lines 250-250 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

Before uploading any part of their research project into a generative AI tool, King's postgraduate research students must discuss confidentiality, copyright, data protection and ethical considerations with their supervisory team and receive approval to proceed. The terms of any supervisory approval should be documented in writing, either in the agreed minutes of a supervisory meeting or in an email between the supervisory team and the student.

draft-claim-kcl-doctoral-upload-supervisor-approval

Preliminary discussions between doctoral students and supervisors; lines 252-252 of captured page text

1b5648a579910bcd366eaec85b06b0205a5991befd431a0fb3a6ff761a940b3c

Before uploading any part of their research project into a generative AI tool, King's postgraduate research students must discuss confidentiality, copyright, data protection and ethical considerations with their supervisory team and receive approval to proceed. The terms of any supervisory approval should be documented in writing, either in the agreed minutes of a supervisory meeting or in an email between the supervisory team and the student.

draft-claim-kcl-doctoral-upload-supervisor-approval

Preliminary discussions between doctoral students and supervisors; lines 272-272 of captured page text

1b5648a579910bcd366eaec85b06b0205a5991befd431a0fb3a6ff761a940b3c

King's guidance for AI-assisted marking and feedback (July 2025) says staff should never upload student work to any AI system without explicit consent and forethought, should not include student details or upload work into any GenAI tool without explicit permission, should use approved or supported university GenAI tools, and should keep reading and assessing student work primarily human with human oversight. Staff should not use GenAI tools to detect students' use of GenAI. This guidance governs staff marking and data handling; it is not a rule about students' own AI use.

draft-claim-kcl-ai-assisted-marking

Scope; lines 156-156 of captured page text

900f04b8200eb1fd5fe7840cd58646356e7b8f064b7881c9b3173771694c27c5

King's guidance for AI-assisted marking and feedback (July 2025) says staff should never upload student work to any AI system without explicit consent and forethought, should not include student details or upload work into any GenAI tool without explicit permission, should use approved or supported university GenAI tools, and should keep reading and assessing student work primarily human with human oversight. Staff should not use GenAI tools to detect students' use of GenAI. This guidance governs staff marking and data handling; it is not a rule about students' own AI use.

draft-claim-kcl-ai-assisted-marking

Principles; lines 202-204 of captured page text

900f04b8200eb1fd5fe7840cd58646356e7b8f064b7881c9b3173771694c27c5

King's guidance for AI-assisted marking and feedback (July 2025) says staff should never upload student work to any AI system without explicit consent and forethought, should not include student details or upload work into any GenAI tool without explicit permission, should use approved or supported university GenAI tools, and should keep reading and assessing student work primarily human with human oversight. Staff should not use GenAI tools to detect students' use of GenAI. This guidance governs staff marking and data handling; it is not a rule about students' own AI use.

draft-claim-kcl-ai-assisted-marking

Principles; lines 208-208 of captured page text

900f04b8200eb1fd5fe7840cd58646356e7b8f064b7881c9b3173771694c27c5

King's guidance for AI-assisted marking and feedback (July 2025) says staff should never upload student work to any AI system without explicit consent and forethought, should not include student details or upload work into any GenAI tool without explicit permission, should use approved or supported university GenAI tools, and should keep reading and assessing student work primarily human with human oversight. Staff should not use GenAI tools to detect students' use of GenAI. This guidance governs staff marking and data handling; it is not a rule about students' own AI use.

draft-claim-kcl-ai-assisted-marking

Principles; lines 212-212 of captured page text

900f04b8200eb1fd5fe7840cd58646356e7b8f064b7881c9b3173771694c27c5

King's guidance for AI-assisted marking and feedback (July 2025) says staff should never upload student work to any AI system without explicit consent and forethought, should not include student details or upload work into any GenAI tool without explicit permission, should use approved or supported university GenAI tools, and should keep reading and assessing student work primarily human with human oversight. Staff should not use GenAI tools to detect students' use of GenAI. This guidance governs staff marking and data handling; it is not a rule about students' own AI use.

draft-claim-kcl-ai-assisted-marking

Our guidelines for AI-assisted marking and feedback; lines 220-220 of captured page text

900f04b8200eb1fd5fe7840cd58646356e7b8f064b7881c9b3173771694c27c5

King's College London states that all staff and students have access to text and image generation through Microsoft Copilot when logged into their KCL Microsoft account, and that its Enterprise licence provides commercial data protection. This is tool access only: it does not authorise AI use in a particular assessment, and the student guidance separately tells students not to input personal data, sensitive information or content created by others into any AI platform.

cl-kings-college-london-microsoft-copilot-198

Equity of access; lines 214-214 of captured page text

ca24453f069fb2243629bd6e43c2cb5aa57a2fef0ad4721d11d3ee57e6855bb1

King's College London states that its Enterprise licence means Copilot use comes with commercial data protection, making it a more secure alternative to other generative AI tools. Commercial data protection does not mean any data may be entered: King's student guidance says not to input personal data, sensitive information or content created by others into any AI platform.

CL-007

Equity of access; lines 214-214 of captured page text

ca24453f069fb2243629bd6e43c2cb5aa57a2fef0ad4721d11d3ee57e6855bb1

King's College London's student guidance states that Microsoft Copilot is available to all King's students with their KCL Microsoft login credentials. The guidance does not describe Copilot as the only, primary or required AI tool, and availability does not grant permission to use it in a specific assessment.

CL-012

Text generation; lines 180-180 of captured page text

3eea2074456e43ca13d816549e2a0a4fbcac13261120addbddb656b949c4b6a4

King's College London permits doctoral students to use generative AI tools in an assistive role in thesis writing, to clarify their own writing and avoid misrepresenting their meaning; this can include rewriting, rephrasing or paraphrasing parts of the thesis. Use beyond the circumstances permitted by the doctoral guidance risks breaching the Academic Misconduct Policy, and AI used in the research process itself (for example to analyse data) is largely outside this guidance and falls under research design, ethical review and research-integrity norms.

CL-009

Are students allowed to use generative AI tools when writing their thesis?; lines 168-170 of captured page text

1b5648a579910bcd366eaec85b06b0205a5991befd431a0fb3a6ff761a940b3c

King's College London permits doctoral students to use generative AI tools in an assistive role in thesis writing, to clarify their own writing and avoid misrepresenting their meaning; this can include rewriting, rephrasing or paraphrasing parts of the thesis. Use beyond the circumstances permitted by the doctoral guidance risks breaching the Academic Misconduct Policy, and AI used in the research process itself (for example to analyse data) is largely outside this guidance and falls under research design, ethical review and research-integrity norms.

CL-009

Assistive use; lines 218-218 of captured page text

1b5648a579910bcd366eaec85b06b0205a5991befd431a0fb3a6ff761a940b3c

King's College London permits doctoral students to use generative AI tools in an assistive role in thesis writing, to clarify their own writing and avoid misrepresenting their meaning; this can include rewriting, rephrasing or paraphrasing parts of the thesis. Use beyond the circumstances permitted by the doctoral guidance risks breaching the Academic Misconduct Policy, and AI used in the research process itself (for example to analyse data) is largely outside this guidance and falls under research design, ethical review and research-integrity norms.

CL-009

Scope; lines 204-204 of captured page text

1b5648a579910bcd366eaec85b06b0205a5991befd431a0fb3a6ff761a940b3c

Before uploading any part of their research project into a generative AI tool, King's postgraduate research students must discuss confidentiality, copyright, data protection and ethical considerations with their supervisory team and receive approval to proceed. The terms of any supervisory approval should be documented in writing, either in the agreed minutes of a supervisory meeting or in an email between the supervisory team and the student.

draft-claim-kcl-doctoral-upload-supervisor-approval

Preliminary discussions between doctoral students and supervisors; lines 252-252 of captured page text

1b5648a579910bcd366eaec85b06b0205a5991befd431a0fb3a6ff761a940b3c

Before uploading any part of their research project into a generative AI tool, King's postgraduate research students must discuss confidentiality, copyright, data protection and ethical considerations with their supervisory team and receive approval to proceed. The terms of any supervisory approval should be documented in writing, either in the agreed minutes of a supervisory meeting or in an email between the supervisory team and the student.

draft-claim-kcl-doctoral-upload-supervisor-approval

Preliminary discussions between doctoral students and supervisors; lines 272-272 of captured page text

1b5648a579910bcd366eaec85b06b0205a5991befd431a0fb3a6ff761a940b3c

When King's postgraduate research students submit a thesis, they must also submit the Thesis Submission Declaration Form (RD2), signed by the student and supervisors, and select one of two AI declarations: that no part of the thesis was generated by AI software (grammar and spell checking is consistent with this), or that AI software was used to rewrite, rephrase or paraphrase parts of the thesis to ensure the quality of the English, naming the tools used. Both declarations describe permitted approaches.

draft-claim-kcl-doctoral-rd2-declaration

Thesis Submission Declaration Form (RD2); lines 282-282 of captured page text

1b5648a579910bcd366eaec85b06b0205a5991befd431a0fb3a6ff761a940b3c

When King's postgraduate research students submit a thesis, they must also submit the Thesis Submission Declaration Form (RD2), signed by the student and supervisors, and select one of two AI declarations: that no part of the thesis was generated by AI software (grammar and spell checking is consistent with this), or that AI software was used to rewrite, rephrase or paraphrase parts of the thesis to ensure the quality of the English, naming the tools used. Both declarations describe permitted approaches.

draft-claim-kcl-doctoral-rd2-declaration

RD2 declaration 1; lines 286-286 of captured page text

1b5648a579910bcd366eaec85b06b0205a5991befd431a0fb3a6ff761a940b3c

When King's postgraduate research students submit a thesis, they must also submit the Thesis Submission Declaration Form (RD2), signed by the student and supervisors, and select one of two AI declarations: that no part of the thesis was generated by AI software (grammar and spell checking is consistent with this), or that AI software was used to rewrite, rephrase or paraphrase parts of the thesis to ensure the quality of the English, naming the tools used. Both declarations describe permitted approaches.

draft-claim-kcl-doctoral-rd2-declaration

RD2 declaration 2; lines 292-292 of captured page text

1b5648a579910bcd366eaec85b06b0205a5991befd431a0fb3a6ff761a940b3c

When King's postgraduate research students submit a thesis, they must also submit the Thesis Submission Declaration Form (RD2), signed by the student and supervisors, and select one of two AI declarations: that no part of the thesis was generated by AI software (grammar and spell checking is consistent with this), or that AI software was used to rewrite, rephrase or paraphrase parts of the thesis to ensure the quality of the English, naming the tools used. Both declarations describe permitted approaches.

draft-claim-kcl-doctoral-rd2-declaration

RD2; lines 296-296 of captured page text

1b5648a579910bcd366eaec85b06b0205a5991befd431a0fb3a6ff761a940b3c

King's College London doctoral examiners must not upload any part of a student's thesis into a generative AI tool or use external AI detection software when assessing the thesis.

CL-010

Doctoral assessment > Principles for generative AI use by doctoral researchers at King's > Examiners

7a1dd2b317bc654cd4834c6dcd738cf2b2f1334c0d29a89e641af8466c836601