版本差异
Durham University
针对...的统一追踪器差异 public-release-20260523-001。未发布完整的源页面文本；仅显示简短的原始语言证据片段以供引用参考。
统一差异
基于公开版本快照生成的版本间跟踪器变更。
Durham University public-release-20260523-001 差异
初始跟踪发布。
+41-0
11 # Durham University AI policy diff
22 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
33 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
4+academic_integrity: The Durham Common Awards page says its AI policy requires students to paste a completed AI declaration into summative assignments before submission.
5+Evidence (en-GB, 6bd549214781): The policy requires students to copy and paste a completed AI declaration into summative assignments before submitting them.
6+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z
47 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
58 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
9+ai_tool_treatment: Durham Common Awards guidance says some limited uses of generative AI do not count as academic misconduct if work remains the student's own, AI use is acknowledged where required, and caution is demonstrated.
10+Evidence (en-GB, 6bd549214781): In general, however, other limited uses of generative AI to facilitate your work do not count as academic misconduct, provided that the resulting work still reflects your own engagement with your sources, your own understanding, and your own reasoning and judgments; you clearly acknowledge any use of AI that has substantially informed the content or presentation of your work; and you demonstrate appropriate caution about the limitations of the tools you use.
11+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z
612 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
713 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
14+academic_integrity: For Common Awards summative assessments, Durham guidance says students must not use generative AI to create substantive content that they present as their own creation.
15+Evidence (en-GB, 6bd549214781): You must not use generative AI to create substantive content for your assessed work that you then present as if it were your own creation.
16+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z
817 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
918 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
19+academic_integrity: For Common Awards students, Durham guidance says students must not provide generative AI with others' material unless it is public-domain material, permitted material, or protected from training use.
20+Evidence (en-GB, 6bd549214781): You must not provide a generative AI with any text or other material produced by others, unless that material is in the public domain, or you have explicit permission to do so, or you have confirmation that the content will not be used to train the AI in question.
21+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z
1022 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
1123 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
24+source_status: Durham Common Awards AI academic-misconduct policy is scoped to students' use of generative AI in summative assessments on Common Awards modules.
25+Evidence (en-GB, 6bd549214781): It applies to students' use of generative AI in summative assessments on Common Awards modules. Its only purpose is to define which uses of generative AI count as academic misconduct in that context.
26+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z
1227 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
1328 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
29+teaching: DCAD assessment guidance says actively addressing generative AI in assessment briefs can promote open dialogue with students and help assessments reflect programme learning outcomes and disciplinary practices.
30+Evidence (en-GB, 1389b6697486): Actively addressing genAI, whether implicitly (by designing assessments that focus on human abilities and development) or explicitly (by including genAI in assessment briefs), helps to promote open dialogue about these tools with students and to ensure that assessments reflect programme learning outcomes and disciplinary practices.
31+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z
1432 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
1533 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
34+teaching: DCAD assessment guidance says marking criteria should be reviewed alongside assessment redesign in light of generative AI.
35+Evidence (en-GB, 1389b6697486): It is also evident that, whether learning outcomes change significantly or not, marking criteria should be reviewed alongside the assessment redesign process.
36+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z
1637 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
1738 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
39+teaching: DCAD assessment guidance says starting an iterative programme-level discussion about learning outcomes and generative AI is highly recommended rather than ignoring already occurring shifts.
40+Evidence (en-GB, 1389b6697486): However, starting this discussion as an iterative process amidst uncertainty is highly recommended versus ignoring the many shifts that have already occurred.
41+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z
1842 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
1943 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
44+source_status: Durham's public DCAD generative-AI resources page lists an internal Institutional Policy on Generative Artificial Intelligence for Learning, Teaching and Assessment dated June 2025.
45+Evidence (en-GB, 221e2a570ee0): Institutional Policy on Generative Artificial Intelligence for Learning, Teaching and Assessment, June 2025
46+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z
2047 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
2148 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
49+ai_tool_treatment: Durham Global Opportunities guidance says using generative AI in Global Opportunities applications is unadvisable and may negatively affect an application.
50+Evidence (en-GB, ba5fed62f973): It is unadvisable to use generative AI and it may negatively affect your application.
51+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z
2252 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
2353 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
54+ai_tool_treatment: Durham Global Opportunities guidance says asking an AI tool to proofread in British English would be appropriate where the original text was generated by the human applicant.
55+Evidence (en-GB, ba5fed62f973): Asking an AI tool to 'proof read in British English' would be appropriate use (just as asking a friend or relative to proof read would be) as the original 'generation' of the text was by the human applicant.
56+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z
2457 ## Source attribution added
2558 An official source attribution was added to the tracker record.
59+Source https://dcad-resourcebank.webspace.durham.ac.uk/2024/07/16/generative-ai-in-learning-teaching-assessment/ snapshot 221e2a570ee0f05193c1c10adf79de564f2d41ecbc1b47022911bc621811ff5b
60+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z
2661 ## Source attribution added
2762 An official source attribution was added to the tracker record.
63+Source https://dcad-resourcebank.webspace.durham.ac.uk/2025/08/27/assessment-and-marking-in-light-of-generative-ai/ snapshot 1389b66974862e4fff2fea15285fd78f4603e27555e1ee323e9b762ed57e3301
64+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z
2865 ## Source attribution added
2966 An official source attribution was added to the tracker record.
67+Source https://www.durham.ac.uk/departments/academic/common-awards/policies-processes/assessment/academic-misconductai-policy-and-guidance/ snapshot 6bd5492147814398f3b03f2c6582dec73f9e4fcc5f8c2d65bc374eb8a2489432
68+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z
3069 ## Source attribution added
3170 An official source attribution was added to the tracker record.
71+Source https://www.durham.ac.uk/global-durham/global-opportunities/ai-guidance/ snapshot ba5fed62f973242d6badd63c3179a12ddf500109aa5f7ecc8c5e234c7fb5b787
72+Tracker checked at: 2026-05-14T02:12:31.000Z
如何阅读此差异
追踪器发布元数据，而非大学发布时间点的直接证明。
新提取的主张是追踪器的新增项，不一定是大学新发布的。来源快照变更意味着同一 URL 产生了不同的哈希值；这可能是政策文本、布局、导航或元数据的变化。
边界
仅限追踪器元数据
This tracker 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.