University of Colombo

This policy applies to the use of generative AI (GenAI) tools in academic and administrative activities. GenAI is broadly defined as "systems that possess the ability to process data in a way that resembles human intelligence" such as resembling human reasoning, learning, or creativity.

Students and staff remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, quality and integrity of all completed works, regardless of whether AI tools were used or not. AI can assist their works, but it cannot replace their own critical analysis and intellectual contribution. Students and staff are required to review, fact-check, and edit any AI-generated content before incorporating it into academic or administrative works.

If students use AI for the purposes beyond those specified in 1 - 2 above, they must explicitly acknowledge such use of AI in their work. The declaration should include a short description as to how the tool was used, name and version of the AI system used, the scope or purpose of use, preferably with the AI prompt or type of input provided. In all instances, the original intellectual work, analysis, interpretation, and synthesis must be carried out by the student.

AI tools must not be used to mark or grade student works, generate evaluative feedback, or contribute to summative assessment decisions. AI systems/tools may only be used in assessment processes where the tool has undergone institutional review, rigorous validation and quality assurance, and where meaningful human oversight is maintained. Assessment decisions must remain fully human-led unless these checks are in place.

Using AI tools in all assessments (summative, formative, self-assessment, continuous assessments, in-class assessments, final assessments, etc.) is not permitted, unless instructions explicitly authorise such use in a particular academic activity/question/assignment. In the absence of such permission to use AI tools, it should be considered that the use of AI is not permitted. Using AI tools in summative assessment without authorisation is considered cheating and tantamount to an examination offence similar to the use of unauthorized material at an examination.

This policy applies to the use of generative AI (GenAI) tools in academic and administrative activities. GenAI is broadly defined as "systems that possess the ability to process data in a way that resembles human intelligence" such as resembling human reasoning, learning, or creativity.

Students and staff remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, quality and integrity of all completed works, regardless of whether AI tools were used or not. AI can assist their works, but it cannot replace their own critical analysis and intellectual contribution. Students and staff are required to review, fact-check, and edit any AI-generated content before incorporating it into academic or administrative works.

If students use AI for the purposes beyond those specified in 1 - 2 above, they must explicitly acknowledge such use of AI in their work. The declaration should include a short description as to how the tool was used, name and version of the AI system used, the scope or purpose of use, preferably with the AI prompt or type of input provided. In all instances, the original intellectual work, analysis, interpretation, and synthesis must be carried out by the student.

AI tools must not be used to mark or grade student works, generate evaluative feedback, or contribute to summative assessment decisions. AI systems/tools may only be used in assessment processes where the tool has undergone institutional review, rigorous validation and quality assurance, and where meaningful human oversight is maintained. Assessment decisions must remain fully human-led unless these checks are in place.

If students use AI for the purposes beyond those specified in 1 - 2 above, they must explicitly acknowledge such use of AI in their work. The declaration should include a short description as to how the tool was used, name and version of the AI system used, the scope or purpose of use, preferably with the AI prompt or type of input provided. In all instances, the original intellectual work, analysis, interpretation, and synthesis must be carried out by the student.

Sharing with/uploading of sensitive or confidential information to an AI tool or any online sharing platform is strictly prohibited. Students must never input, upload, or share sensitive, confidential, or personally identifiable information (PII) into any AI tool or online platform. Staff must never input, upload, or share sensitive, confidential, or personally identifiable information (PII) into any AI tool or online platform.

If students use AI for the purposes beyond those specified in 1 - 2 above, they must explicitly acknowledge such use of AI in their work. The declaration should include a short description as to how the tool was used, name and version of the AI system used, the scope or purpose of use, preferably with the AI prompt or type of input provided. In all instances, the original intellectual work, analysis, interpretation, and synthesis must be carried out by the student.

AI tools must not be used to mark or grade student works, generate evaluative feedback, or contribute to summative assessment decisions. AI systems/tools may only be used in assessment processes where the tool has undergone institutional review, rigorous validation and quality assurance, and where meaningful human oversight is maintained. Assessment decisions must remain fully human-led unless these checks are in place.

This policy applies to the use of generative AI (GenAI) tools in academic and administrative activities. GenAI is broadly defined as "systems that possess the ability to process data in a way that resembles human intelligence" such as resembling human reasoning, learning, or creativity.

AI tools must not be used to mark or grade student works, generate evaluative feedback, or contribute to summative assessment decisions. AI systems/tools may only be used in assessment processes where the tool has undergone institutional review, rigorous validation and quality assurance, and where meaningful human oversight is maintained. Assessment decisions must remain fully human-led unless these checks are in place.