Coventry, United Kingdom Last checked Jul 19, 2026

The University of Warwick

Independent · Open access · Not an official university page

What would you like to check?

Can I use AI for my coursework?Read scoped evidence; review pending Do I need to disclose AI use?Read scoped evidence; review pending Can I upload sensitive data?Read scoped evidence; review pending Which tools can I access?Read scoped evidence; review pending

Use in ChatGPT ↗Before you submitAdvice and precautions Record updates ↓

Explore the current record by topic

Coursework

Read scoped evidence; review pending

Follow the assessment brief and course handbook: their requirements may restrict or prohibit AI use. General availability of a tool does not override them.

Official source ↗

Exams

Read scoped evidence; review pending

Check the requirements for the specific assessment; the recorded general position does not grant blanket exam permission.

Official source ↗

Disclosure

Read scoped evidence; review pending

At submission, state whether AI was used. If it was, explain why, where and how, following the assessment’s requirements.

Official source ↗

Privacy and data

Read scoped evidence; review pending

Do not enter protected data without the required prior IDG or Research Ethics approval. A Warwick-account Copilot recommendation is not that approval.

Official source ↗

Tools and eligibility

Read scoped evidence; review pending

Student guidance recommends Copilot chat with a Warwick account for relevant data, but access, data approval and assessment permission remain separate.

Official source ↗

Research and publication

Read scoped evidence; review pending

Research guidance requires researchers to consider AI-related risks and retain responsibility, including for misconduct arising inadvertently through a tool.

Official source ↗

Academic integrity

Read scoped evidence; review pending

Student guidance requires transparent AI disclosure. Research accountability rules separately cover misuse of data or others’ work; no fixed student penalty is established here.

Official source ↗

Teaching guidance

Read scoped evidence; review pending

Assessment-design guidance calls for thoughtful support of AI-assisted submissions so human achievement remains clear; it is guidance for teaching design, not task permission.

Official source ↗

Security and procurement

Read scoped evidence; review pending

The Information Compliance Policy covers staff, students and others in scope; all new AI uses must follow appropriate procurement processes, regardless of cost.

Official source ↗

Do

Follow the AI requirements in your assessment brief and course handbook.
Requirement in this scope
Follow the AI requirements in your assessment brief and course handbook.
Scope
Assessment briefs and course handbooks control student use; research, procurement and data approvals have their own scope.
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.
Original evidence and scope
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.
claim-warwick-001
Follow the assessment brief and course handbook: their requirements may restrict or prohibit AI use. General availability of a tool does not override them.
The general position is that you can use Artificial Intelligence (AI) but must follow any requirements set out in assessments and course handbooks. Those requirements may restrict or prohibit the use of AI.
Key principles for using AI / Check the rules
Official university source ↗
State whether you used AI and, if so, explain why, where and how at submission.
Requirement in this scope
State whether you used AI and, if so, explain why, where and how at submission.
Scope
Assessment briefs and course handbooks control student use; research, procurement and data approvals have their own scope.
Warwick's student-facing guidance says students are required to state whether AI was used in the submission process and explain why, where, and how it was used.
Original evidence and scope
Warwick's student-facing guidance says students are required to state whether AI was used in the submission process and explain why, where, and how it was used.
claim-warwick-002
At submission, state whether AI was used. If it was, explain why, where and how, following the assessment’s requirements.
You will be required to state if any AI has been used as part of the submission procedure. If you use an AI, you must set out why, where and how you have done so.
Key principles for using AI / Declare it
Official university source ↗
For a new AI use within the Information Compliance Policy, follow the appropriate procurement process even if the tool is free.
Requirement in this scope
For a new AI use within the Information Compliance Policy, follow the appropriate procurement process even if the tool is free.
Scope
Assessment briefs and course handbooks control student use; research, procurement and data approvals have their own scope.
Warwick's AI Information Compliance Policy says all new uses of AI tools, products, or services must go through appropriate procurement processes, regardless of cost.
Original evidence and scope
Warwick's AI Information Compliance Policy says all new uses of AI tools, products, or services must go through appropriate procurement processes, regardless of cost.
claim-warwick-009
The Information Compliance Policy covers staff, students and others in scope; all new AI uses must follow appropriate procurement processes, regardless of cost.
Regardless of costs, all new uses of AI tools and services/products or services, must go through appropriate procurement processes.
Principles of the policy
Official university source ↗
Warwick's AI Information Compliance Policy covers everyone with a contractual or implied relationship with the University and all information processed by the University.
Original evidence and scope
Warwick's AI Information Compliance Policy covers everyone with a contractual or implied relationship with the University and all information processed by the University.
claim-warwick-008
The Information Compliance Policy covers staff, students and others in scope; all new AI uses must follow appropriate procurement processes, regardless of cost.
The policy covers everyone who has a contractual (formal or informal/implied) relationship with the University, including employees, students, visiting academics, and consultants. The policy covers all information processed by the University, regardless of ownership or format.
Scope and definitions
Official university source ↗

Don’t

Do not input the protected data categories in IMP02 without prior IDG or Research Ethics Committee approval.
Requirement in this scope
Do not input the protected data categories in IMP02 without prior IDG or Research Ethics Committee approval.
Scope
Assessment briefs and course handbooks control student use; research, procurement and data approvals have their own scope.
Warwick's AI Information Compliance Policy says certain data, including personal or confidential material, University intellectual property, and some copyrighted or third-party data, must not be put into AI software without prior approval.
Original evidence and scope
Warwick's AI Information Compliance Policy says certain data, including personal or confidential material, University intellectual property, and some copyrighted or third-party data, must not be put into AI software without prior approval.
claim-warwick-010
Do not enter protected data without the required prior IDG or Research Ethics approval. A Warwick-account Copilot recommendation is not that approval.
Certain types of data must never be put into any AI software, without prior approval from IDG or the Research Ethics Committee. These include: Passwords and usernames. Personally identifiable information (PII) or other sensitive or confidential material. Any data related to University Intellectual Property.
Data restrictions
Official university source ↗
Do not treat a Copilot recommendation as permission to ignore your assessment requirements.
Site advice
Do not treat a Copilot recommendation as permission to ignore your assessment requirements.
Scope
Assessment briefs and course handbooks control student use; research, procurement and data approvals have their own scope.
Warwick's student-facing guidance tells students not to enter personal or confidential data into AI tools unless they understand what will happen to the data, and recommends Copilot chat with a Warwick account for that kind of data.
Original evidence and scope
Warwick's student-facing guidance tells students not to enter personal or confidential data into AI tools unless they understand what will happen to the data, and recommends Copilot chat with a Warwick account for that kind of data.
claim-warwick-003
Do not enter protected data without the required prior IDG or Research Ethics approval. A Warwick-account Copilot recommendation is not that approval.
Do not input any personal or confidential data into any AI tools, unless you fully understand what will happen to that data. The university recommends using Co-Pilot chat for this kind of data - when logged in with your Warwick account.
Key principles for using AI / Protect privacy
Official university source ↗
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.
Original evidence and scope
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.
claim-warwick-001
Follow the assessment brief and course handbook: their requirements may restrict or prohibit AI use. General availability of a tool does not override them.
The general position is that you can use Artificial Intelligence (AI) but must follow any requirements set out in assessments and course handbooks. Those requirements may restrict or prohibit the use of AI.
Key principles for using AI / Check the rules
Official university source ↗
In research, do not assume an AI tool removes your responsibility for unacknowledged use of others’ work or mishandled data.
Requirement in this scope
In research, do not assume an AI tool removes your responsibility for unacknowledged use of others’ work or mishandled data.
Scope
Assessment briefs and course handbooks control student use; research, procurement and data approvals have their own scope.
Warwick's AI in research guidance says researchers are responsible for misconduct-type practices involving AI, including improper handling of information or use of another person's ideas, even if such practices occur inadvertently through an AI tool.
Original evidence and scope
Warwick's AI in research guidance says researchers are responsible for misconduct-type practices involving AI, including improper handling of information or use of another person's ideas, even if such practices occur inadvertently through an AI tool.
claim-warwick-006
Research guidance requires researchers to consider AI-related risks and retain responsibility, including for misconduct arising inadvertently through a tool.
Misconduct in research includes: the fabrication or falsification of research data; improper handling of information on individuals collected during research; or the use of another person's ideas, work or research data without appropriate acknowledgement. Researchers are responsible for any such practices, even if they occur inadvertently through the use of an AI tool.
Breach of Responsibilities and Expected Standards
Official university source ↗

AI use questioned?Investigation, possible outcomes and appeal

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.

Microsoft Copilot

Record updatesLast 90 days · Recorded updates: 3

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

2026-10-27Page update
Other records · Page update
View revision
Loading revision…
2026-10-26Record maintenance
Other records · Record maintenance
View revision
Loading revision…
2026-10-25Record maintenance
Other records · Record maintenance
View revision
Loading revision…

Reviewed claims

Historical and pending public Claims (1)

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.

cl-university-of-warwick-microsoft-copilot-333 · excluded_pending_review

Service/account access; module tutor, assessment brief and course handbook control assessment scope.

University recommendation/provision of Copilot is not permission for any submitted assessment.

Record history

Official sources

6 official URLs; 6 source attributions and their captured versions retained.

AI - responsible and ethical use

warwick.ac.uk

University official source

warwick.ac.uk

Hash and captured version

AI - responsible and ethical use · 2026-05-12T22:21:00Z

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

4356f58aa1414208de3428defac59acb5c56892702f221bd6289197a647c2cfa

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

Official source ↗

AI and assessment

warwick.ac.uk

University official source

warwick.ac.uk

Hash and captured version

AI and assessment · 2026-05-12T22:19:00Z

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

c8778870c27eb60e1857cf5af569aa6e52c267782801abaa0715c75a1d54fb32

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

Official source ↗

AI in Research

warwick.ac.uk

University official source

warwick.ac.uk

Hash and captured version

AI in Research · 2026-05-12T22:20:00Z

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

1a449b904c0f60a6da8bca48b656f747dc49d6fcd795977119d90335f6329b1d

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

Official source ↗

AI tools for education

warwick.ac.uk

University official source

warwick.ac.uk

Hash and captured version

AI tools for education · 2026-07-15T22:52:43.896Z

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

463ea04d7e3277e54765ceaee7180fd840e6d59aae2e0a72463187fbe93eec65

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

Official source ↗

Artificial Intelligence and Academic Integrity

warwick.ac.uk

University official source

warwick.ac.uk

Hash and captured version

Artificial Intelligence and Academic Integrity · 2026-05-12T22:18:00Z

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

f80891d64ee96bdeb9ffc903c76f6b5e7415f586a6fe7f7fcbe87bbbb414c9d6

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

Official source ↗

IMP 02: AI Information Compliance Policy

warwick.ac.uk

University official source

warwick.ac.uk

Hash and captured version

IMP 02: AI Information Compliance Policy · 2026-05-12T22:22:00Z

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

b3469285b32f952808d46b3255197d884ec334304f6aa6f30b066787f6ea2d95

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: qs71-90-v6-completeness-r3-20261025
Dataset release: public-release-20260924-002
Correction published: 2026-10-26T02:55:31.205Z
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.

Institution audit PARTIAL. Official raw HTML/PDF originals and full version/context verification remain incomplete.
Original public records remain unchanged. Excluded records are historical or pending scope review, not current permissions.
New corrections, tools, student interpretations and snapshots remain unapproved.

Current reviewed JSON

Questions students ask

Can I use AI for my coursework?

Follow the assessment brief and course handbook: their requirements may restrict or prohibit AI use. General availability of a tool does not override them.

View evidence →

Do I need to disclose AI use?

At submission, state whether AI was used. If it was, explain why, where and how, following the assessment’s requirements.

View evidence →

Can I upload sensitive data?

Do not enter protected data without the required prior IDG or Research Ethics approval. A Warwick-account Copilot recommendation is not that approval.

View evidence →

Which tools can I access?

Student guidance recommends Copilot chat with a Warwick account for relevant data, but access, data approval and assessment permission remain separate.

View evidence →

What are the examination rules?

Check the requirements for the specific assessment; the recorded general position does not grant blanket exam permission.

View evidence →

What rules apply to research and publication?

Research guidance requires researchers to consider AI-related risks and retain responsibility, including for misconduct arising inadvertently through a tool.

View evidence →

What counts as academic misconduct?

Student guidance requires transparent AI disclosure. Research accountability rules separately cover misuse of data or others’ work; no fixed student penalty is established here.

View evidence →

What guidance applies to teaching?

Assessment-design guidance calls for thoughtful support of AI-assisted submissions so human achievement remains clear; it is guidance for teaching design, not task permission.

View evidence →

What security and procurement requirements apply?

The Information Compliance Policy covers staff, students and others in scope; all new AI uses must follow appropriate procurement processes, regardless of cost.

View evidence →

When was this record checked?

Record checked: 2026-07-19

Record version →

Which official sources support these rules?

Official source →

Where can I read the full evidence?

11 · Full policy evidence

Full policy evidence →

The University of Warwick

What would you like to check?

Explore the current record by topic

Coursework

Exams

Disclosure

Privacy and data

Tools and eligibility

Research and publication

Academic integrity

Teaching guidance

Security and procurement

Do

Don’t

Tool discovery records: scope pending review

Microsoft Copilot

Reviewed claims

Official sources

AI - responsible and ethical use

AI and assessment

AI in Research

AI tools for education

Artificial Intelligence and Academic Integrity

IMP 02: AI Information Compliance Policy

Related university AI policy records

Questions students ask