Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

UCSI University

Student guide · Task scope and procedure

Read the thesis body alongside its declaration sample.

The May 2026 thesis guide requires a separate AI declaration, advises against replacing critical academic work, and prohibits sensitive data in third-party tools. Appendix examples do not waive those restrictions. The postgraduate scholarly-work rule has its own conditions. General plagiarism/exam support and the old 2016 SDB appeal document are not certified current AI procedures.

A complete student policy summary is not available yet; see the collected claims and sources.

Scope and transition details

The May 2026 thesis guide requires a separate AI declaration, advises against replacing critical academic work, and prohibits sensitive data in third-party tools. Appendix examples do not waive those restrictions. The postgraduate scholarly-work rule has its own conditions. General plagiarism/exam support and the old 2016 SDB appeal document are not certified current AI procedures.

Read the thesis body alongside its declaration sample. hero illustration; exact scope and conditions are in the adjacent source-linked text.
Check the rule for your school and assignment.

What happens if AI use raises a concern?

Supplement collected: 2026-10-08 · Current applicability not independently confirmed

Compare published university record ↗

When a concern arises

AI-specific sourceFormal procedureModality: Informational

Site interpretation

UCSI’s thesis/dissertation guide (11 May 2026 Rev.04 footer) requires a separate GenAI declaration page. AI should not bypass learning or replace original research, data interpretation or argument development, and confidential/sensitive data must not enter third-party tools. The body points to a separate GenAI teaching/learning guideline not acquired here.

Scope: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · Only the captured source, version, audience and conditions; no exhaustive currency certification.

View original text and conditions

Scope: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · university

3.2.5 Declaration for the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Thesis/ Dissertation Disclosure of the use of generative artificial intelligence tools in the preparation of thesis/dissertation must be made by the candidates. This declaration ensures transparency, academic integrity, and accountability in the use of emerging technologies. The declaration must be placed in a separate page under the heading titled " Declaration for the Use of Generative AI in Thesis/ Dissertation” (Refer to APPENDIX 4). Generative AI tools should not be used to bypass learning or replace critical academic tasks such as original research, data interpretation, or argument development. Confidential or sensitive data must not be entered into any third-party AI tools to safeguard privacy and data security. Candidates should refer to “Guideline for Generative AI Tools Usage in Teaching and Learning” of UCSI University in preparation of thesis/dissertation.
View official source ↗

Collected: 2026-10-08 · 618–631
SHA-256: 5b862ba2d718fc39b045e504182a662fd951e8a8f519f2a6f142d01acb5a8e17

AI-specific sourceFormal procedureModality: Informational

Site interpretation

Appendix 4’s sample declaration includes examples such as initial drafts and data analysis, while the main text says AI should not replace critical academic tasks. The sample is not treated as blanket permission to outsource those tasks; the body, applicable policy and supervisor’s directions still need checking.

Scope: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · Only the captured source, version, audience and conditions; no exhaustive currency certification.

View original text and conditions

Scope: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · university

APPENDIX 4 EXAMPLE OF DECLARATION FOR THE USE OF GENERATIVE AI IN THESIS/DISSERTATION 2.5 cm 3.5 cm DECLARATION OF DECLARATION FOR THE USE OF 2.5 cm GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) IN THESIS/DISSERTATION 2 spaces In accordance with the guidelines for responsible AI use at UCSI University, I hereby declare that I have utilized generative AI tools during the preparation of this thesis. The tools used include [NAME OF TOOL/SERVICE], which were employed for 1 line spacing [SPECIFY PURPOSE, e.g., enhance language clarity, generate initial drafts, or assist with data analysis] All content generated by this tool has been thoroughly reviewed and edited by me to ensure its accuracy, originality, and compliance with academic standards. I take full responsibility for the content of this thesis and confirm that the use of AI tools has been transparently documented.
View official source ↗

Collected: 2026-10-08 · 1344–1368
SHA-256: 5b862ba2d718fc39b045e504182a662fd951e8a8f519f2a6f142d01acb5a8e17

Generative AI tools should not be used to bypass learning or replace critical academic tasks such as original research, data interpretation, or argument development. Confidential or sensitive data must not be entered into any third-party AI tools to safeguard privacy and data security. Candidates should refer to “Guideline for Generative AI Tools Usage in Teaching and Learning” of UCSI University in preparation of thesis/dissertation.
View official source ↗

Collected: 2026-10-08 · 627–631
SHA-256: 5b862ba2d718fc39b045e504182a662fd951e8a8f519f2a6f142d01acb5a8e17

AI-specific sourceFormal procedureModality: Informational

Site interpretation

The postgraduate handbook permits GenAI for publications and scholarly work only in compliance with UCSI Academic Integrity and AI policies. Students remain responsible for originality, accuracy, integrity and authenticity, with no plagiarism, fabrication or falsification. This does not establish a universal undergraduate assessment permission.

Scope: Postgraduate scholarly authors · Only the captured source, version, audience and conditions; no exhaustive currency certification.

View original text and conditions

Scope: Postgraduate scholarly authors · university

The use of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the preparation of publications and other scholarly work is permitted only when it complies with the UCSI University Academic Integrity Policy and Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy. Postgraduate students remain fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, integrity and authenticity of all submitted work, and the use of generative AI must not result in plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or any other form of academic misconduct.
View official source ↗

Collected: 2026-10-08 · 1512–1516
SHA-256: 5fcbbef2c27e5d3e74964b0551a40ab46e763ecc5517f0aa3729c8e769b89906

How you can respond

Source guidanceOfficial guidanceModality: Informational

Site interpretation

The library’s Turnitin guide tells academics to request an instructor account and students to use a lecturer’s Class ID/enrolment key with UCSI email. It establishes a plagiarism/citation support route, not an AI detector deployment or numerical verdict.

Scope: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · Only the captured source, version, audience and conditions; no exhaustive currency certification.

View original text and conditions

Scope: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · university

Turnitin Guideline Turnitin is a valuable academic tool provided by the Tan Sri Musa Mohamad Library to uphold integrity and originality in academic work. It is used to detect plagiarism, ensure proper citation practices, and encourage students to produce authentic content. Contact Tan Sri Musa Mohamad Library for the Turnitin instructor account (Academician). A student account can be created using your lecturer's Class ID and enrollment key. Please use the UCSI email for the Turnitin account.
View official source ↗

Collected: 2026-10-08 · 50–52
SHA-256: 6e05e961f60624ade2fdb3001e4493a815e1de2539f3f4953d2467e79938940a

Source guidanceFormal procedureModality: Informational

Site interpretation

For the undergraduate handbook’s coursework-plagiarism category, the lecturer gathers evidence, confirms it with the named faculty committee and schedules a student meeting to explain the allegation and obtain a response. The 5%–25% numbers describe coursework weighting, not a plagiarism threshold. This is not a complete AI investigation procedure.

Scope: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · Only the captured source, version, audience and conditions; no exhaustive currency certification.

View original text and conditions

Scope: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · university

14.1 Plagiarism in Course Work Components The course work components are taken to mean any take-home written assignments between the percentages of 5% to 25%. If sufficient evidence of plagiarism is found in a student’s work, the following procedure shall take place: 1) The lecturer/examiner of that piece of work is to gather the evidence for documentation; 2) Confirmation with the Dean or Deputy Dean of Faculties, Director of the Centre/Institute and member of Centres/Faculties/Institutes/Schools that the piece of work does indeed contain plagiarized work. These “members” will form the immediate committee to address this incident until the matter is resolved; 3) Request for you to attend a scheduled meeting with the lecturer/examiner, the Dean or Deputy Dean and members of Centres/Faculties/Institutes/Schools. This is to be completed within three (3) days from the date of discovery and with the meeting agenda extended to you. Failure to be present at the meeting may add on penalty to the case, unless proven that the absenteeism is due to extenuating circumstances; 4) During the meeting, you will be explained on the allegation of plagiarism and requested to clarify and respond. The Committee would allow you to admit the offence and where possible, resolve the matter informally.
View official source ↗

Collected: 2026-10-08 · 2514–2532
SHA-256: c2ed21820177f2fc23b53a6238bf6af8a1b8f0b0eca7444277128dec4104b77f

General support onlyFormal procedureModality: Informational

Site interpretation

The undergraduate disability-exam guidance asks students to contact the Faculty by semester week 8 or eight weeks before final exams, whichever is earlier, with evidence for case-by-case reasonable adjustments. This general exam support is not AI permission or a disciplinary-hearing accommodation rule.

Scope: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · Only the captured source, version, audience and conditions; no exhaustive currency certification.

View original text and conditions

Scope: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · university

13.14 Exam guidelines for students with disabilities Disabled students, including but not limited to those with a chronic medical or mental health condition, autism, sensory or mobility impairment, or learning difference (such as dyslexia) should contact the Faculty no later than the 8th week of the semester or 8 weeks before the start of the final exam period, whichever is earlier, to allow adequate time for a needs assessment, and for lecturers to make reasonable adjustments to a student's teaching and assessment. Students are asked for evidence of disability and a diagnostic assessment containing recommendations for examinations support to inform and speed the process of implementing support. The Faculty is required to make a case-by-case assessment of students’ disability-related support needs in relation to programme requirements. For this reason, there can be no fixed inventory of standard/allowable adjustments, as all adjustments which do not compromise genuine competence standards, and which the Faculty may reasonably be capable within its institutional resource of providing, must be available. Where implementing the adjustments a disabled student requires may
View official source ↗

Collected: 2026-10-08 · 2318–2332
SHA-256: c2ed21820177f2fc23b53a6238bf6af8a1b8f0b0eca7444277128dec4104b77f

Possible outcomes

Source guidanceFormal procedureModality: Informational

Site interpretation

The 2016 SDB policy makes penalties dependent on seriousness and permits combinations, including reprimand, probation, withheld/revoked awards and failing grades in the specified contexts. It is general student discipline, not an AI-specific automatic sanction. No current AI tariff is established.

Scope: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · Only the captured source, version, audience and conditions; no exhaustive currency certification.

View original text and conditions

Scope: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · university

7.0 PENALTIES 7.1 Degrees of Student Discipline Penalties vary according to the seriousness of the offence. A student found guilty of misconduct may be liable to any one or a combination of the following punishments: 7.1.1 Reprimand A written reprimand from the Chairperson of SDB to the student. 7.1.2 Probation Further violations will result in severe disciplinary action and can include conditions related to the misconduct, such as counselling, educational seminars, or unpaid work assignments. Failure to meet the condition(s) shall be considered as an additional violation. 7.1.3 Disciplinary Probation Student is required to comply with specified terms and conditions that include not engaging in further conduct in violation of these clauses, and can include conditions related to the misconduct, such as to attend counselling, educational seminars, or unpaid work assignments. Failure to meet the condition(s) shall be considered as an additional violation. 7.1.4 Withholding of grades or official transcript or degree, or denial of Degree. May be imposed for scholastic dishonesty. 7.1.5 Revocation or withdrawal of Degree May be imposed when the violation involves scholastic dishonesty or otherwise calls into question the integrity of the work required for the Degree. 7.1.6 Failing grade for an examination or assignment or course and/or cancellation of all or any portion of prior course credit. May be imposed for breach of Examination Rules.
View official source ↗

Collected: 2026-10-08 · 319–347
SHA-256: f9980a9bf33e3bf07624a61c22c3fc4d27c62b77f45fec9c4fcdea0050866b29

Review & appeal

Source guidanceFormal procedureModality: Informational

Site interpretation

The separately published SDB Policy V11 revised 8 April 2016 allows the complainant and/or accused student written appeal to the Vice Chancellor within 14 days from the date the SDB decision is made; the VC informs the final decision within 30 days, without an explicit start in that sentence. Both day types are unspecified. Its continued public availability does not certify that this old version governs a current case.

SDB V11 2016 written appeal · 14 days (type unspecified)

Student · Required when using this procedure

Within the stated period. Check the source summary and original text for the starting point, scope and exceptions.

VC final written response under 2016 policy · 30 days (type unspecified)

Institution · Required when using this procedure

Within the stated period · Starting point not specified. Check the source summary and original text for the starting point, scope and exceptions.

Scope: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · Only the captured source, version, audience and conditions; no exhaustive currency certification.

View original text and conditions

Scope: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · university

5.2.3 Appeal Process a) The student(s), complainant and/or accused may appeal the decision of the SDB, in writing, to the University’s Vice Chancellor. b) All appeals must be submitted in writing to the VC within fourteen (14) days from the date the decision of the SDB is made. c) Failure to appeal within the above time frame renders the SDB’s decision final. Page 5 SAA/SDB Policy V11 REV_ 08042016 d) The appeal must be made in writing and must state the reasons why the SDB’s decision is believed to be inappropriate. e) Appeals can be based on, but are not restricted to, the following: i) Procedural irregularity on the part of the SDB; ii) Insufficient evidence to warrant the actions taken; iii) Lack of due process or discrimination including racism, sexism, etc.; iv) The sanction will have unforeseen consequences for the student(s) that are harsher than intended; and v) That new and substantial evidence, previously unavailable to the SDB, bears importantly in the student’s favour. f) The VC will review all information regarding the student’s appeal and will inform the student in writing of the final decision within 30 days. g) The VC may require a separate hearing in order to make a decision on the appeal. h) The decision of the VC is final.
View official source ↗

Collected: 2026-10-08 · 251–276
SHA-256: f9980a9bf33e3bf07624a61c22c3fc4d27c62b77f45fec9c4fcdea0050866b29

Collection & version notes

Published source-based additions. English summaries and original-language quotations are shown separately from the reviewed record. These are possible processes and outcomes, not automatic penalties for AI use. Present applicability has not been independently confirmed; check the source scope and version.

Source-text comparison; not an official translation

Hashes allow comparison of saved content; they do not certify current validity or immutability. These topics are not a mandatory sequence.

AI tools & access

Tool access is not permission to use AI in an assessment. Check your assignment rules, eligible users and data restrictions.

Archived tool record; consult the official source for current access.

  • AI toolsTool mentioned; institutional access not establishedAvailability not established
    Access, conditions & official evidence
    Source 1 ↗

    Original quotation

    For thesis and dissertation preparation, UCSI's postgraduate guidelines advise that generative AI tools should not be used to bypass learning or replace original research, data interpretation, or argument development.
    Source 2 ↗

    Original quotation

    Generative AI tools should not be used to bypass learning or replace critical academic tasks such as original research, data interpretation, or argument development.

Reviewed record

Reviewed claims

7 reviewed claims

Academic Integrity5 reviewed claims

Academic Integrity

UCSI University's 2025 thesis and dissertation guidelines require postgraduate candidates to disclose use of generative AI tools in preparing a thesis or dissertation.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence93%

Normalized value: postgraduate_thesis_genai_disclosure_required

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Disclosure of the use of generative artificial intelligence tools in the preparation of thesis/dissertation must be made by the candidates.

Academic Integrity

UCSI's Tan Sri Musa Mohamad Library provides Turnitin as an academic tool for plagiarism detection, citation practices, and encouraging authentic student work.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence90%

Normalized value: library_turnitin_plagiarism_detection_tool

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Turnitin is a valuable academic tool provided by the Tan Sri Musa Mohamad Library to uphold integrity and originality in academic work. It is used to detect plagiarism, ensure proper citation practices, and encourage students to produce authentic content.

Academic Integrity

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.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence89%

Normalized value: postgraduate_exam_electronic_devices_prohibited

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Prohibited Items... Electronic devices (smart watch, Bluetooth hand-free)... Open book exams are meant for open book format, but do not cover access for internet or computer devices.

Academic Integrity

UCSI's postgraduate handbook treats repeated plagiarism as an academic-integrity offence that can lead to fail grades, suspension, and termination after repeated offences.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence88%

Normalized value: postgraduate_repeated_plagiarism_penalties

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Where a student is found to have committed the plagiarism offence again... The penalty for such level of plagiarism, if proven with documented evidence is automatic Fail grade in that module... When a student is caught plagiarizing after the third time... Your study at UCSI University will be terminated.

Academic Integrity

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.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence85%

Normalized value: undergraduate_exam_electronic_devices_prohibited

Original evidence

Evidence 1
To understand and comply with all the rules, regulations, procedures and guidelines stated in the Student Handbook... Prohibited Items... Electronic devices... Open book exams are meant for open book format, but do not cover access for internet or computer devices.
Privacy1 reviewed claim

Privacy

For thesis and dissertation preparation, UCSI's postgraduate guidelines state that confidential or sensitive data must not be entered into third-party AI tools.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence94%

Normalized value: postgraduate_thesis_sensitive_data_must_not_be_entered_into_third_party_ai_tools

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Confidential or sensitive data must not be entered into any third-party AI tools to safeguard privacy and data security.
Ai Tool Treatment1 reviewed claim

Ai Tool Treatment

For thesis and dissertation preparation, UCSI's postgraduate guidelines advise that generative AI tools should not be used to bypass learning or replace original research, data interpretation, or argument development.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence90%

Normalized value: postgraduate_thesis_genai_should_not_replace_core_academic_tasks

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Generative AI tools should not be used to bypass learning or replace critical academic tasks such as original research, data interpretation, or argument development.

Source record

Official sources

4 sources

Open official source list
Record information, JSON & citation
ReviewAI-assisted reviewConfidence94%Snapshot statusNot publishedJSONPublic JSON

Citation: University AI Policy Tracker. "UCSI University AI Policy Tracker record." Last checked May 16, 2026. https://eduaipolicy.org/universities/ucsi-university

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

Open change log

Saved from University AI Policy Tracker. This record summarizes the cited sources; it is not an official university statement or assessment permission. Source and review dates are listed above. Hashes identify retained content, not authorization.