这次记录更新意味着什么
结构化记录概览
涉及 16 条 (更正／调整 15 · 补录 1)
AI 工具使用规则 · 其他记录 · 另 3 个主题
本次修订尚无经独立审核的摘要。
这是历史记录摘要，不确认当前使用权限，也不证明学校发布了新规。
学术诚信 · 涉及 7 条 (更正／调整 7)
本站更正
本站结论文字对照
−旧文本Staff setting summative assessment must: declare whether/how students can use AI; review assessment design for alignment with permitted AI use; ensure equality of baseline AI tool provision where authorised; specify declaration forms for student AI use; only identify suspected unauthorised AI use through marking or university-endorsed detection tools (none currently endorsed); and handle misconduct under usual disciplinary regulations.
+新文本Staff setting summative assessment must: declare whether/how students can use AI; review assessment design for alignment with permitted AI use; ensure equality of baseline AI tool provision where authorised; specify declaration forms for student AI use; only identify suspected unauthorised AI use through marking or university-endorsed detection tools (the public page says none had received endorsement at its last update); and handle misconduct under usual disciplinary regulations.
本站更正
暂无可比较的新旧文字。
旧文本Students undertaking summative assessment must: complete assessment in line with the AI use declaration for each assignment; acknowledge their AI use via a formal declaration in the prescribed format; and understand that submitting work breaching AI specifications constitutes cheating and may constitute plagiarism, handled under usual disciplinary regulations.
新文本Students undertaking summative assessment must: complete assessment in line with the AI use declaration for each assignment; acknowledge their AI use via a formal declaration in the prescribed format; and understand that submitting work breaching AI specifications constitutes cheating and may constitute plagiarism, handled under usual disciplinary regulations.
本站更正
本站结论文字对照
−旧文本Oxford requires postgraduate research students to include a statement on their use of generative AI in their final thesis submission.
+新文本MPLS guidance for DPhil and MSc by Research summative assessment requires a statement on GenAI use in the final thesis for submissions from Trinity Term 2026. The statement goes immediately after the abstract and covers compliance, uses and referencing. This is MPLS guidance, not proof of an identical rule in every division.
本站更正
本站结论文字对照
−旧文本For PGR summative assessment (transfer, confirmation, thesis), the following AI uses are permitted without declaration: local editing tools (grammar assistants, spell-checkers, code debuggers making small local changes); AI for background research, language translation, bibliography creation, and general subject understanding; and AI for coding where coding serves a research purpose but is not the substantive output. Students remain responsible for correctness of any code used.
+新文本For MPLS postgraduate research summative assessment, local editing and debugging tools are permitted without declaration. Background research, translation, bibliography indexes and general understanding are allowed without declaration. AI coding is permitted when it serves a research purpose and is not the substantive project output; students remain responsible for correctness and should declare AI-generated code, excluding debugging.
本站更正
本站结论文字对照
−旧文本For PGR students, the following uses of generative AI are not permitted in summative assessments: substantive original writing by GenAI (verbatim or closely paraphrased for chapters or parts thereof) which constitutes plagiarism; using AI to produce plots or data visualisations directly from prompts; and entering private or confidential data into third-party AI tools.
+新文本MPLS postgraduate research guidance prohibits substantive AI-written thesis content, including close paraphrases, and producing plots or data visualisations directly from prompts. It distinguishes refining plotting code from generating research results. Confidential/private data use remains subject to applicable University data rules and approved institutional services.
本站更正
本站结论文字对照
−旧文本Unauthorised use of generative AI falls under the University's plagiarism regulations and is subject to academic penalties in summative assessments. Students must learn and practise academic skills of note-taking and clear attribution to differentiate their own work from AI-derived material. Where AI use is authorised, students should give clear acknowledgment of how it has been used.
+新文本Oxford’s public summative-assessment policy says work breaching the assignment’s AI specifications constitutes cheating and may constitute plagiarism; suspected misuse is handled under usual disciplinary regulations and processes. It does not establish an AI-specific penalty.
本站更正
暂无可比较的新旧文字。
旧文本The University's policy on AI use in summative assessment is based on three principles endorsed by Education Committee in Trinity term 2025: (1) educational practice must be grounded in values of integrity, honesty and transparency, which must be clearly articulated and frequently discussed; (2) every discrete unit of assessment must be carefully designed to be fit for its specific purposes, clearly articulated to students; (3) every summative assessment must be accompanied by a clear explanation of what appropriate assistance is permitted and what is forbidden, specifying how students should report assistance received.
新文本The University's policy on AI use in summative assessment is based on three principles endorsed by Education Committee in Trinity term 2025: (1) educational practice must be grounded in values of integrity, honesty and transparency, which must be clearly articulated and frequently discussed; (2) every discrete unit of assessment must be carefully designed to be fit for its specific purposes, clearly articulated to students; (3) every summative assessment must be accompanied by a clear explanation of what appropriate assistance is permitted and what is forbidden, specifying how students should report assistance received.
研究 · 涉及 1 条 (补录 1)
本站补录
新增
+Oxford’s research policy says users of a discrete GenAI tool should declare substantive use in their work. Where relevant they must make prompts and outputs available under open research principles. Its scope defines exclusions for certain assistance tasks; assessment research must also meet summative-assessment rules.
AI 工具使用规则 · 涉及 4 条 (更正／调整 4)
本站更正
本站结论文字对照
−旧文本ChatGPT Edu is listed for University of Oxford in an official university AI tools source. Derived availability: allowed. Derived endorsement type: not specified.
+新文本Oxford’s public AI Competency Centre tool guide lists ChatGPT Edu as a University SSO platform with a Confidential TPSA rating. Standard access is listed as free; Microsoft 365 Copilot and Google Gemini Pro are separate paid products. The guide has moved to OxIntranet and is no longer maintained; check successor guidance for current terms. Tool access is not assessment permission.
本站更正
本站结论文字对照
−旧文本Codex is listed for University of Oxford in an official university AI tools source. Derived availability: allowed. Derived endorsement type: not specified.
+新文本Oxford’s public AI Competency Centre tool guide lists Codex as a University SSO platform with a Confidential TPSA rating. Standard access is listed as free; Microsoft 365 Copilot and Google Gemini Pro are separate paid products. The guide has moved to OxIntranet and is no longer maintained; check successor guidance for current terms. Tool access is not assessment permission.
本站更正
本站结论文字对照
−旧文本Google Gemini is listed for University of Oxford in an official university AI tools source. Derived availability: allowed. Derived endorsement type: not specified.
+新文本Oxford’s public AI Competency Centre tool guide lists Google Gemini as a University SSO platform with a Confidential TPSA rating. Standard access is listed as free; Microsoft 365 Copilot and Google Gemini Pro are separate paid products. The guide has moved to OxIntranet and is no longer maintained; check successor guidance for current terms. Tool access is not assessment permission.
本站更正
本站结论文字对照
−旧文本Microsoft Copilot Chat is listed for University of Oxford in an official university AI tools source. Derived availability: allowed. Derived endorsement type: not specified.
+新文本Oxford’s public AI Competency Centre tool guide lists Microsoft Copilot Chat as a University SSO platform with a Confidential TPSA rating. Standard access is listed as free; Microsoft 365 Copilot and Google Gemini Pro are separate paid products. The guide has moved to OxIntranet and is no longer maintained; check successor guidance for current terms. Tool access is not assessment permission.
来源状态 · 涉及 3 条 (更正／调整 3)
本站更正
本站结论文字对照
−旧文本External custom GPTs should not be used to process confidential University data or sensitive personal data. No non-public University data (including confidential, internal, or personal data) may be incorporated in any custom GPT shared with external users.
+新文本The former Oxford public Information Security URL cited for external custom GPT use now says the content has moved. The earlier recorded guidance is historical and is not current approval or prohibition. Consult successor Cyber Security/OxIntranet guidance; current detailed conditions could not be independently retrieved.
本站更正
本站结论文字对照
−旧文本All cloud-based generative AI tools must be subject to a security risk assessment before being used with University information. Free and open-source services generally cannot complete a full assessment and should not be used for confidential information.
+新文本The former Oxford public Information Security URL cited for cloud-AI security assessment now says the content has moved. The earlier recorded guidance is historical and is not current approval or prohibition. Consult successor Cyber Security/OxIntranet guidance; current detailed conditions could not be independently retrieved.
本站更正
本站结论文字对照
−旧文本Unapproved AI transcription bots should not be used in Teams meetings. The inbuilt Teams Transcription facility or Microsoft Copilot may be used subject to appropriate data protection considerations. Other AI transcription bot services should be avoided, and meeting organisers should set options to prevent participants from adding unapproved transcription bots.
+新文本The former Oxford public Information Security URL cited for AI transcription bots now says the content has moved. The earlier recorded guidance is historical and is not current approval or prohibition. Consult successor Cyber Security/OxIntranet guidance; current detailed conditions could not be independently retrieved.
其他记录 · 涉及 1 条 (更正／调整 1)
本站更正
本站结论文字对照
−旧文本ChatGPT Edu and Google Gemini, when licensed via the AI Competency Centre, have been approved for processing of Confidential University data by the Information Security team. University data processed through these licensed platforms will not be used to train AI models. Confidential data must only be used with the University's approved, SSO-protected platforms.
+新文本The public Oxford AI Competency Centre guide lists ChatGPT Edu, Codex, Google Gemini and Microsoft Copilot Chat with Confidential TPSA ratings and University SSO. It now states that the public guide is no longer maintained and points to successor University guidance. This does not approve GitHub Copilot or personal consumer accounts.
官方来源 · 来源检查
来源检查
暂无可比较的新旧文字。
来源检查
暂无可比较的新旧文字。
来源检查
暂无可比较的新旧文字。
来源检查
暂无可比较的新旧文字。
来源检查
暂无可比较的新旧文字。
来源检查
暂无可比较的新旧文字。
来源检查
暂无可比较的新旧文字。
来源检查
暂无可比较的新旧文字。
来源检查
暂无可比较的新旧文字。
