建议做

Kingston upon Thames, United Kingdom
本站使用指南
本轮 2026/27 AR6 要求本人表达及披露 AI 贡献,同时保留任务说明明确例外。课程团队承担举证责任。陪同与特殊代表权限不同。AR8 复核受程序理由限制,完整提交期限仍未核实;研究 AR7 另行适用。
本站解读;官方证据保留原文。
尚无完整的学生政策摘要;可先查看已收录条款及来源。
本轮 2026/27 AR6 要求本人表达及披露 AI 贡献,同时保留任务说明明确例外。课程团队承担举证责任。陪同与特殊代表权限不同。AR8 复核受程序理由限制,完整提交期限仍未核实;研究 AR7 另行适用。



补充资料采集: 2026-10-08 · 现行适用性未独立确认
本站解读
2026/27 授课课程 AR6 要求作品体现本人表达,并适当披露 AI 工具贡献;该授课规定与研究学位 AR7 分别适用。
适用范围: taught-course students · Scope is limited to the cited official source and stated conditions; this is a local candidate, not a complete university rule set.
The 2026/27 taught-course AR6 requires work in the student’s own voice and proper acknowledgement of contributions by AI tools. This taught-course regulation is distinct from the research-degree AR7.
适用范围: taught-course students · university
9. Academic integrity means demonstrating honest, moral behaviours when
producing academic work. This involves acknowledging the work of others,
giving appropriate credit to others where their ideas are presented as part
of a students’ work and the importance of producing work in the student’s
own voice. Contributions by artificial intelligence (AI) tools must also be
properly acknowledged. As part of a learning community students share
ideas and develop new ones- they need to be able to interpret and present
other people’s ideas and combine these with their own when producing their
work. To achieve this, students need to develop skills of reflection and self-
awareness about topics such as fairness, responsibility and respect in
academic practice.查看官方来源 ↗采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 156–166
SHA-256: acfb85c29fe926871e6ed46aad3ad0463ca15ec8e6012199a93e9723721ab340
本站解读
AR6 将未经适当披露、把 AI 生成内容当作本人作品列为不可接受用途;但评估性质允许且任务说明明确写明时有例外。须同时保留披露条件及这项明确例外。
适用范围: taught-course students · Scope is limited to the cited official source and stated conditions; this is a local candidate, not a complete university rule set.
AR6 defines unacceptable GenAI use as presenting generated content as one’s own without proper acknowledgement, except where the assessment’s nature permits this and the brief explicitly states it. Preserve both the acknowledgement condition and the stated exception.
适用范围: taught-course students · university
Unacceptable use of Generative Artificial Intelligence
16. The University defines the unacceptable use of Generative Artificial
Intelligence as the act of presenting content generated by artificial
intelligence tools (such as text, media, tables etc – list not exhaustive), as
one’s own without proper acknowledgement, except where the nature of the
assessment makes this permissible and is explicitly stated in the
assessment brief.查看官方来源 ↗采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 264–271
SHA-256: acfb85c29fe926871e6ed46aad3ad0463ca15ec8e6012199a93e9723721ab340
本站解读
授课案件按概率优势标准认定;课程团队须提供符合定义的违规证据,学生不须证明没有发生。双方可陈述观点。
适用范围: taught-course students · Scope is limited to the cited official source and stated conditions; this is a local candidate, not a complete university rule set.
The taught-course finding uses balance of probability: course teams must provide evidence that the defined misconduct occurred. Students are not required to prove that it did not. Both parties may present their viewpoint.
适用范围: taught-course students · university
3. The procedures allow both parties to present their viewpoints. Further
information relating to accompaniment and representation can be found in
the sections below.
4. A finding that academic misconduct has occurred is a judgement based on
available evidence, the standard of proof being the balance of probability.
What this means is that, on the basis of the evidence, it is more likely than
not that academic misconduct has occurred. Course teams are therefore
required to provide evidence that academic misconduct against the
definitions provided in this procedure has taken place. The student is not
required to prove that it has not.查看官方来源 ↗采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 112–122
SHA-256: acfb85c29fe926871e6ed46aad3ad0463ca15ec8e6012199a93e9723721ab340
本站解读
正式通知应提供与指控相关的证据,例子包括标注提交文本/Turnitin 来源报告或监考材料。可向 Kingston Students’ Union Advice Centre 求助及请求旁听;该段规定其人员不能作代理。这里的 Turnitin 来源报告不能证明已启用 AI 检测。
适用范围: taught-course students · Scope is limited to the cited official source and stated conditions; this is a local candidate, not a complete university rule set.
The formal notice supplies relevant allegation evidence; the examples include a marked submission/Turnitin sources or invigilator material. Contact Kingston Students’ Union Advice Centre for advice and possible observation; the cited officers cannot act as advocates. A Turnitin-source report here is not proof of an AI detector licence.
适用范围: taught-course students · university
36. If the individual considering the case judges that a formal hearing is
justified, the student will be provided with:
(a) a copy of these procedures;
(b) written details of the allegation and a copy of all evidence provided for
the hearing by the academic who had made the allegation. This will
include specific reference to the assessment in question and the nature
of the suspected misconduct. For example:
(i) in a case of suspected plagiarism, the student should be provided
with a copy of their work with the sections where plagiarism is
suspected indicated which may include a copy of the Turnitin
report detailing the identified sources;
(ii) in a case of suspected cheating in an examination venue the
student should be provided with a copy of the (suitably redacted)
Chief Invigilators’ report and copies of any materials removed
from the student in the exam venue (if applicable);
(c) advice to contact the Kingston Students’ Union Advice Centre (see
http://www.kingstonstudents.net/advice or email
support@kingston.ac.uk). Although the Kingston Students’ Union
officers cannot act as advocates, they may be able to advise on the
case and may agree to act as an observer at the hearing;查看官方来源 ↗采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 499–521
SHA-256: acfb85c29fe926871e6ed46aad3ad0463ca15ec8e6012199a93e9723721ab340
本站解读
AR6 区分 A–D 处分,从评估部分零分且可重考,到模块零分并由 PAB 终止学籍;重考/重修资格及及格分封顶随处分和标准条例不同。这是附条件的结果,不是 AI 自动处分。
适用范围: taught-course students · Scope is limited to the cited official source and stated conditions; this is a local candidate, not a complete university rule set.
AR6 distinguishes penalties A–D, from zero for an assessment element with possible retake to zero for a module and termination by the PAB. Retake/repeat permissions and pass-mark caps differ by penalty and standard regulations. These are conditional outcomes, not automatic AI sanctions.
适用范围: taught-course students · university
Summary of penalties applicable for Academic Misconduct
Penalty Summary
Penalty A Element of assessment awarded a mark of zero (Z). reassessment by
retake is permitted if required.
Penalty B Module and element of assessment awarded a mark of zero (Z).
Reassessment by retake is permitted, if this is allowed by the
standard assessment regulations.
If the reassessment is being undertaken in retake mode, the penalty
only requires reassessment in the piece of work in which the academic
misconduct took place. However, where other elements are failed,
these too should be set as retake as per assessment regulations.
Where any subsequent reassessment is judged to be of the required
pass standard, the overall module result will be capped at the
minimum pass mark.
Additional learning support to be provided.
Penalty C Module and element of assessment awarded a mark of zero (Z).
Reassessment by retake will not be permitted.
An opportunity to repeat/replace the module is permitted, if this is
allowed by the standard assessment regulations.
Where any subsequent reassessment is judged to be of the required
pass standard, the overall module result will be capped at the
minimum pass mark.
Penalty D Module and element of assessment awarded a mark of zero (Z).
A PAB will terminate the registration and award based on credit
achieved at that point.查看官方来源 ↗采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 935–970
SHA-256: acfb85c29fe926871e6ed46aad3ad0463ca15ec8e6012199a93e9723721ab340
本站解读
授课学生可在 Misconduct Panel 或 Programme Assessment Board 最终决定后,因未依程序处理而按 AR8 请求复核;除此以外不能申诉该 Board 的处分。本段 AR6 没有申请期限,不推导 AR8 数值期限。
适用范围: taught-course students · Scope is limited to the cited official source and stated conditions; this is a local candidate, not a complete university rule set.
A taught-course student may seek AR8 review after the Misconduct Panel or final Programme Assessment Board decision where the procedure was not followed; otherwise the Board’s penalty cannot be appealed. AR6 does not provide a filing deadline in this passage, so no numeric AR8 clock is inferred.
适用范围: taught-course students · university
79. A student can use the procedures set out in Academic Regulations 8:
Academic Appeals (Taught Courses) to request a review of an outcome in
relation to Academic Misconduct either following the Academic Misconduct
Panel or following the final decision of the Programme Assessment Board if
there is evidence that the procedure was not followed.
80. A student cannot otherwise appeal against the penalty imposed by the
Programme Assessment Board.查看官方来源 ↗采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 860–867
SHA-256: acfb85c29fe926871e6ed46aad3ad0463ca15ec8e6012199a93e9723721ab340
本站解读
听证可带一名符合条件的同伴,但不能代为陈述或提问/回答。第三方代表须有疾病/残障等充分理由、Academic Registrar 批准及签署同意。陪同不等于无限制代理发言。
适用范围: taught-course students · Scope is limited to the cited official source and stated conditions; this is a local candidate, not a complete university rule set.
One eligible companion may attend a hearing but cannot make representations or ask/answer for the student. Third-party representation requires a compelling reason such as illness/disability, the Academic Registrar’s approval and signed consent. Do not treat accompaniment as unrestricted advocacy.
适用范围: taught-course students · university
57. Students invited to attend a hearing may be accompanied by one friend,
family member, officer or staff member from the Kingston Students’ Union
Advice Centre, or a Trade Union or professional association staff member, if
applicable. The individual accompanying is not permitted to make
representations, or ask or answer questions on behalf of the student.
Representation
58. Representation by any third party will only be permitted where there is a
compelling reason, for example, ill health and/or disability and if considered
necessary by the Academic Registrar (whose decision is final). In such
circumstances, the student must provide signed written consent for the
representation.查看官方来源 ↗采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 685–697
SHA-256: acfb85c29fe926871e6ed46aad3ad0463ca15ec8e6012199a93e9723721ab340
已发布的来源补充。英文摘要与原语言引文和已审核记录分开展示。这里列出可能的程序与结果,不是使用 AI 的自动处罚;现行适用性尚未独立确认,请核对来源的适用范围和版本。
按所存原文核对;不是官方译文
哈希仅用于核对所存内容,不证明现行有效性或不可篡改。这些主题不表示每个学生都会经历的流程。
能获取工具不等于获准在作业中使用。请同时核对任务规则、适用人员和数据限制。
尚未建立这所大学的可靠工具记录。这不代表工具不存在,也不代表禁止使用 AI。
Reviewed record
5 条已审核条款
Academic Integrity
标准化值: unacceptable_genai_presenting_ai_content_without_acknowledgement_unless_assessment_brief_permits
原始证据
证据 1The University defines the unacceptable use of Generative Artificial Intelligence as the act of presenting content generated by artificial intelligence tools (such as text, media, tables etc - list not exhaustive), as one's own without proper acknowledgement, except where the nature of the assessment makes this permissible and is explicitly stated in the assessment brief.
Academic Integrity
标准化值: generative_ai_editorial_process_use_must_be_acknowledged
原始证据
证据 1Where a Generative AI has been used as part of the editorial process, then this must be acknowledged by the student.
Academic Integrity
标准化值: ai_contributions_must_be_acknowledged
原始证据
证据 1Contributions by artificial intelligence (AI) tools must also be properly acknowledged.
Ai Tool Treatment
标准化值: generative_ai_treated_as_possible_third_party_editorial_help
原始证据
证据 1This guidance is for use when a student is considering whether to employ a third party such as a professional copy editing or proof-reading company or software tool (including generative artificial intelligence (GAI)) when producing work in draft or final version.
Source Status
标准化值: 2025_26_genai_academic_integrity_definition_and_ag2_editorial_help_source_status
原始证据
证据 1Introduction of a formal definition of use of generative artificial intelligence articulated within our current different types for academic misconduct. This guidance was previously published as an Annex within the Academic Integrity Procedures for Taught and Research degrees (AR6 and AR7) but has been reviewed as a new standalone document which references both AI and non-AI editorial help.
Source record
3 个来源
assets.kingston.ac.uk
assets.kingston.ac.uk
assets.kingston.ac.uk
Citation: University AI Policy Tracker. "Kingston University, London AI Policy Tracker record." Last checked May 18, 2026. https://eduaipolicy.org/universities/kingston-university-london
Original university source language remains canonical. This tracker is not an official university statement.
打开变更日志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.