Policy presence
University of Malta has 3 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Msida, Malta
University of Malta
University of Malta has 6 source-backed AI policy claims from 3 official source attributions. Review state: agent reviewed; 6 reviewed claims. Last checked May 18, 2026.
University of Malta AI policy short answer
v1 public contract
University of Malta has 6 source-backed AI policy claims from 3 official source attributions, including 6 reviewed claims. The record review state is agent reviewed; original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, confidence, and public JSON are preserved for citation. Last checked May 18, 2026. Discovery context: University of Malta is listed as QS 2026 rank 741-750.
Citation-ready summary
As of this public record, University AI Policy Tracker lists University of Malta as an agent-reviewed AI policy record last checked on May 18, 2026 and last changed on May 18, 2026. The record contains 6 source-backed claims, including 6 reviewed claims, from 3 official source attributions. Original-language evidence snippets and source URLs remain canonical, with public JSON available at https://eduaipolicy.org/api/public/v1/universities/university-of-malta.json. The entity-level confidence is 94%. This tracker is not legal advice, not academic integrity advice, and not an official university statement unless the linked source is the university's own official page.
Policy signals in this record
- Evidence includes Academic integrity claims.
- Evidence includes AI tool treatment claims.
- Evidence includes Teaching claims.
- Evidence includes Privacy claims.
- No specific AI service name is highlighted by the current public claim text.
- Teaching, assessment, coursework, or syllabus-related language appears in the public claim text.
- Privacy, sensitive-data, or security language appears in the public claim text.
Review: Agent reviewed
This reference record summarizes visible public data only. Official sources and original-language evidence remain canonical; confidence is separate from review state.
This page 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.
Policy profile
Deterministic source-backed dimensions derived from this record's public claims.
Review: Machine candidate
Policy profile rows are machine-candidate derived metadata. They are not final policy conclusions; inspect the linked claim evidence before reuse.
Analysis page-quality metadata is available at /api/public/v1/analysis/page-quality.json.
AI disclosure
University of Malta has 1 source-backed public claim for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Coursework
University of Malta has 5 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Exams
University of Malta has 5 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Privacy and data entry
University of Malta has 1 source-backed public claim for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Academic integrity
University of Malta has 3 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Approved tools
University of Malta has 1 source-backed public claim for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Named AI services
University of Malta has 2 source-backed public claims for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Teaching guidance
University of Malta has 2 source-backed public claims for teaching guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Research guidance
No source-backed public claim about research AI use is present in this profile.
The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about research use, publication ethics, research data, grants, or human-subjects compliance.
Security and procurement
No source-backed public claim about AI security review or procurement is present in this profile.
The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about security review, procurement, vendor approval, risk assessment, authentication, SSO, or enterprise licensing.
Coverage score measures breadth of public, source-backed coverage only. It is not a policy quality, strictness, legal adequacy, safety, or compliance score.
Evidence-backed claims
6 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Academic Integrity
University of Malta guidance says unacknowledged work generated by AI tools is considered plagiarised work.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: unacknowledged_ai_generated_work_considered_plagiarism
Original evidence
Evidence 1For the avoidance of doubt, the use of unacknowledged work generated by AI tools is also considered by the University as plagiarised work.
Ai Tool Treatment
University of Malta student FAQ guidance tells students to check with their tutor before using Generative AI tools to produce answers in summative assessments.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: students_check_tutor_before_genai_summative_answers
Original evidence
Evidence 1Before you start working on materials submitted for assessment, you are required to check with your tutor if Generative AI tools can be used to produce answers in summative assessments.
Teaching
University of Malta academic-staff guidelines say lecturers decide if and how Generative AI is permitted in a study-unit; if assessment instructions do not mention Generative AI, use is assumed not allowed except for listed support uses.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: lecturer_determines_genai_use_default_not_allowed_except_support_uses
Original evidence
Evidence 1it is up to the individual lecturers, in consultation with the Board of Examiners and/or the Board of Studies, as appropriate, to determine if and how the use of Generative AI tools should be permitted within a given study-unit. If no specific mention is made regarding the use of Generative AI tools in the study-unit assessment guidelines and instructions that are made available to students through the VLE, then it is assumed that the use of these tools is not allowed except for the modalities indicated in Guideline 6.
Localized display only
it is up to the individual lecturers, in consultation with the Board of Examiners and/or the Board of Studies, as appropriate, to determine if and how the use of Generative AI tools should be permitted within a given study-unit. If no specific mention is made regarding the use of Generative AI tools in the study-unit assessment guidelines and instructions that are made available to students through the VLE, then it is assumed that the use of these tools is not allowed except for the modalities indicated in Guideline 6.
Academic Integrity
University of Malta academic-staff guidelines discourage use of AI writing detection tools at this stage and state that Generative AI detection software cannot be used as proof for disciplinary procedures.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: ai_detection_discouraged_not_proof_for_discipline
Original evidence
Evidence 1the use of any AI writing detection tools within UM is discouraged given the unreliability of Generative AI detection software. Besides the detection accuracy concerns mentioned earlier, the students have not given their permission to upload their work to tools other than Turnitin or agreed on how their data will be stored.
Localized display only
The guideline continues that Generative AI detection software cannot be used as proof for disciplinary procedures.
Privacy
University of Malta academic-staff guidelines warn staff to be especially careful not to include sensitive information in prompts to Generative AI tools because of privacy and data-protection concerns.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: staff_avoid_sensitive_information_in_genai_prompts
Original evidence
Evidence 1All University staff should be especially careful not to include any sensitive information in their prompts to these tools due to issues related to privacy and data protection.
Academic Integrity
For the Faculty of Media & Knowledge Sciences, University of Malta guidance says students who use Generative AI should copy every prompt or query in chronological order in an appendix to their work, subject to study-unit requirements.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: maks_students_include_genai_prompt_audit_trail
Original evidence
Evidence 1Copy every prompt or query you give to a generative AI model (in chronological order) in an appendix to your work. Generally, there is no need to include the actual output of the AI model, only the prompts or queries.
Localized display only
This evidence is faculty-scoped to the Faculty of Media & Knowledge Sciences and subject to assessment or study-unit descriptions.
Candidate claims
0 machine or needs-review claim
Candidate claims are not final policy conclusions. They preserve source URL, source snapshot hash, evidence, confidence, and review state so the record can be audited before review.
Official sources
3 source attribution
Guidelines for Academic Staff on the use of Generative AI Tools in Class and in Assessments
um.edu.mt
Responsible Use of Generative AI - L-Universita ta' Malta
um.edu.mt
Written Assignments FAQs - L-Universita ta' Malta
um.edu.mt
Change log
Source-check timeline and diff-style claim/evidence preview.
View the public change record for this university, including source snapshot hashes, claim review states, and a diff-style preview of current source-backed evidence.
Corrections and missing evidence
Corrections create review tasks and do not directly change this public record.
If an official source is missing, stale, moved, blocked, or incorrectly summarized, submit a source URL, policy change report, or institution correction for review. Corrections must preserve source URLs, source language, original evidence, review state, and audit history.