Colombo, Sri Lanka

University of Colombo

本站使用指南

评估须明确授权;先写自己的初稿。

评估 AI 除该活动明确授权外禁止;注明也不准 AI 生成初稿。获准反馈须在本人独立尝试后,残障例外有条件。疑案可送检查,是否处罚由考试委员会决定。教职员研究/评分条款另分受众。

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。

适用范围与过渡细节

评估 AI 除该活动明确授权外禁止;注明也不准 AI 生成初稿。获准反馈须在本人独立尝试后,残障例外有条件。疑案可送检查,是否处罚由考试委员会决定。教职员研究/评分条款另分受众。

Get explicit assessment authorisation; keep your own first draft. hero illustration; exact scope and conditions are in the adjacent source-linked text.
请核对所在学院及具体作业的规定。

AI 使用引发疑虑后,会发生什么?

补充资料采集: 2026-10-08 · 现行适用性未独立确认

对比已发布的大学记录 ↗

哪些行为会引发疑虑

AI 明示条款正式程序规范语气: 禁止

本站解读

Colombo GenAI政策列明各类评估须该活动/题目/作业明确授权 AI;没有许可即不可用。未授权总结性评估使用属于作弊/考试违规;有记录的残障可按适用 UGC/学校/CDREP 规则获考试 AI 合理调整。

适用范围: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · Only the captured source, version, audience and conditions; no exhaustive currency certification.

检测证据 · 支持与合理调整

查看原文与适用条件

英文来源摘要

The University of Colombo GenAI policy prohibits AI in all listed assessment forms unless the particular activity/question/assignment explicitly authorises it; absent permission it is not permitted. Unauthorised summative use is cheating/examination offence. Documented disability accommodations may permit examination AI under applicable UGC/University/CDREP rules.

适用范围: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · university

Non-permitted/prohibited use of AI and punitive consequences 1. 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. 2. 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. The use of AI tools within examinations may be permitted as a reasonable accommodation for students with documented disabilities in accordance with the UGC regulations, regulations of the Centre for Disability Research Education and Practice, University of Colombo, or any other applicable university policy.
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 193–204
SHA-256: 5c88c16103c9a390a008c59f51aaa5a11bec5c0dbdc5cd29e127d343e49b1e1a

Policy on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Academic and Administrative Activities University of Colombo
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 1–3
SHA-256: 5c88c16103c9a390a008c59f51aaa5a11bec5c0dbdc5cd29e127d343e49b1e1a

AI 明示条款正式程序规范语气: 信息性

本站解读

有条件许可的学习任务须先独立尝试或形成可行想法,自主初稿后才可求 AI 反馈/改进;残障相关使用须监督或教师/导师合法指示并符合 CDREP 指南。两者不推翻评估须明确授权规则。

适用范围: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · Only the captured source, version, audience and conditions; no exhaustive currency certification.

检测证据 · 支持与合理调整

查看原文与适用条件

英文来源摘要

For the policy’s conditionally permitted learning tasks, students first work independently or develop a workable idea, then may seek AI feedback/refinement after their own first draft. Disability-related AI use needs supervision or legitimate lecturer/supervisor instructions aligned with CDREP guidance. These clauses do not override the explicit assessment-permission rule.

适用范围: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · university

Permitted use with conditions and limitations The following conditions apply for any learning task requiring critical thinking, problem solving or creativity, and directly linked to a learning outcome in the curriculum. Use of AI in these tasks must be consistent with other sections of the Part I. • Students must first attempt the task on their own or have a workable idea regarding producing their own draft or solution, before obtaining assistance from AI. • Once the first draft is developed independently, the students may consult a GenAI tool to get feedback or suggestions, to compare their solution, or refine the draft. • At all times, the students remain responsible for the work and must ensure that AI output is critically reviewed, edited and matched to their own thinking. Permitted use of AI tools by students with disabilities (e.g., visually impaired, hearing impaired, neurodivergent, etc.) Terminology, which refers to ‘students with disabilities’ or ‘persons with disabilities’ is used in this context based on the United Nations Inclusion Strategy launched in 2019, reflecting a person first and rights-based approach. • Use of AI tools by students with disabilities shall be allowed with supervision or legitimate instructions from the relevant lecturer/supervisor/instructor and in alignment with guidelines provided by the Centre for Disability Research Education and Practice, University of Colombo.
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 158–178
SHA-256: 5c88c16103c9a390a008c59f51aaa5a11bec5c0dbdc5cd29e127d343e49b1e1a

AI 明示条款正式程序规范语气: 信息性

本站解读

教职员研究部分要求按出版方指南负责任使用;学校竞争性资助申请须说明 AI 使用程度,未说明或不可接受使用可被评审拒绝。此处教职员发表/资助/晋升规定不作学生课程许可。

适用范围: Part II staff research · Only the captured source, version, audience and conditions; no exhaustive currency certification.

检测证据 · 支持与合理调整

查看原文与适用条件

英文来源摘要

The staff research section calls for responsible use consistent with publisher guidelines. University grant proposals must acknowledge the extent of AI use; undisclosed or unacceptable use can lead to rejection by the evaluation panel. These staff publication/grant/promotion provisions are not student coursework permissions.

适用范围: University staff researchers · university

Use of AI in research 1. Staff of the University of Colombo are advised to adhere to the guidelines provided by publishers if using AI, and to use AI in a responsible manner to ensure academic integrity in publishing their research. Unethical or misuses of AI in publications would tarnish the credibility of the staff member himself/herself and the name of the University indirectly. 2. If Editorial Boards of journals / research conferences/ symposia affiliated to the University of Colombo find a misuse of AI in research papers submitted, the paper will be rejected or referred back to the authors to revise as per the comments of the editorial board. 3. Staff should not prepare research/project proposals for competitive grants of the University without acknowledging the extent of using AI. If the panel of evaluators observe that AI has been used without acknowledgement or the level of AI usage is unacceptable, the proposal will be rejected. 4. If a selection committee finds a publication enclosed in a promotion application of a staff member has used AI in an unethical manner, the selection committee will disallow the marks claimed for the particular publication.
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 281–295
SHA-256: 5c88c16103c9a390a008c59f51aaa5a11bec5c0dbdc5cd29e127d343e49b1e1a

如何回应与说明

AI 明示条款正式程序规范语气: 信息性

本站解读

不得向外部工具/平台上传敏感、保密、可识别信息或学校/教师材料。未获许可 AI 事件经系主任及 Rector/Dean/Director 报 Deputy Registrar/Examinations,再由考试委员会决定是否处罚;报告不等于自动处罚。

适用范围: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · Only the captured source, version, audience and conditions; no exhaustive currency certification.

检测证据 · 支持与合理调整

查看原文与适用条件

英文来源摘要

Students must not upload sensitive/confidential/identifying information or University/lecturer materials to external tools/platforms. Non-permitted AI incidents go through Head and Rector/Dean/Director to Deputy Registrar/Examinations and then the Examinations Committee to determine any punishment. A report is not an automatic punishment.

适用范围: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · university

7. Data protection, privacy, and confidentiality: Sharing with/uploading of sensitive or confidential information to an AI tool or any online sharing platform is strictly prohibited. 5 Students must never input, upload, or share sensitive, confidential, or personally identifiable information (PII) into any AI tool or online platform. This includes patient information, student or staff records, or any data protected by ethical or legal obligations* Such conduct may violate the ethical principle of confidentiality, personal data protection laws, and institutional ethics policies, and may be treated as a serious professional misconduct issue. Uploading, sharing, or distributing lecture notes, examination papers, or any other material containing university or lecturer information to any external platform or service, for any purpose, is strictly prohibited. 8. In an incident of any non-permitted/prohibited use of AI, academic staff members shall report it to the Deputy Registrar/Examinations of the University through the Head of the Department and Rector/Dean/Director of the Campus/Faculty/Institute. The Deputy Registrar/Examinations shall submit the reported incident to the Examinations Committee of the University to determine the punishment, if any.
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 230–246
SHA-256: 5c88c16103c9a390a008c59f51aaa5a11bec5c0dbdc5cd29e127d343e49b1e1a

AI 明示条款正式程序规范语气: 信息性

本站解读

政策以 ChatGPT、Copilot、Gemini、DeepSeek、Claude、研究辅助、人性化及代码工具说明 GenAI 范围;列名不证明学校许可、学生资格、费用或保密数据输入获准。

适用范围: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · Only the captured source, version, audience and conditions; no exhaustive currency certification.

检测证据 · 支持与合理调整

查看原文与适用条件

英文来源摘要

The policy lists ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, DeepSeek, Claude, research assistants, humanisers and coding tools as examples defining GenAI scope. Listing them does not establish University licences, student access, fees or approved confidential-data handling.

适用范围: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · university

Scope 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. For the purpose of this policy, GenAI tools include but are not limited to the following categories and examples. • Conversational and text-generating tools: e.g., ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Google Gemini, DeepSeek, AlphaProof, AI Claude, AI co-scientist, etc. • Image, audio or video generation tools: e.g., Sora, Runway, Leonardo, Veo 3.1 AI, SunoAI, Grok AI etc. • Automated writing and editing assistants: e.g., Grammarly with AI features, etc. • Research support tools: e.g., Perplexity AI, ResearchRabbit, Scite LLC, Inciteful, Jenni AI, SciSpace AI, Thesis AI, etc. • Paraphrasing and content humanizer tools: e.g., WriteHuman, Ai Rephraser (Grammarly), Sider AI, Humanize AI, etc. • Code generation and programming assistant tools: e.g., GitHub Copilot, etc. • AI tools that enhance accessibility for students with disabilities: visually impaired students in reading documents, accessing audio descriptions e.g., Envision AI, Saathi, Insta Reader
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 26–43
SHA-256: 5c88c16103c9a390a008c59f51aaa5a11bec5c0dbdc5cd29e127d343e49b1e1a

AI 明示条款正式程序规范语气: 信息性

本站解读

教职员不得用 AI 批改/评分、生成评价反馈或参与总结性决定,除非工具经过机构审查、严格验证、质量保证并有实质人工监督。本条有条件,不应写成 AI 绝不参与评估。

适用范围: Academic staff involved in assessment · Only the captured source, version, audience and conditions; no exhaustive currency certification.

检测证据 · 支持与合理调整

查看原文与适用条件

英文来源摘要

Staff may not use AI to mark/grade student work, generate evaluative feedback or contribute to summative decisions unless the tool has institutional review, rigorous validation, quality assurance and meaningful human oversight. The clause is conditional, not a categorical statement that AI never participates in assessment.

适用范围: Academic staff involved in assessment · university

Non-permitted use of AI in teaching 1. Assessment and feedback 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.
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 270–276
SHA-256: 5c88c16103c9a390a008c59f51aaa5a11bec5c0dbdc5cd29e127d343e49b1e1a

支持与合理调整 · 检测证据

AI 明示条款正式程序规范语气: 信息性检测证据

本站解读

AI 生成作业/项目报告初稿即使注明,及禁止的改写均属抄袭,可能取消作业分数;用 humaniser 隐藏来源属故意学术欺骗。疑案可未经学生事先许可送作业作 idiolect/lexicon AI 检查,未把某分数定为确凿证据。

适用范围: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · Only the captured source, version, audience and conditions; no exhaustive currency certification.

查看原文与适用条件

英文来源摘要

AI-developed first drafts of assignments/project reports, even acknowledged, and prohibited paraphrasing count as plagiarism and may lead to cancellation of assignment marks. Humanising to disguise AI origin is intentional academic deception; in suspected cases authorities may submit the assignment for idiolect/lexicon AI detection without prior student permission. No detector score is made conclusive proof.

适用范围: Students in the cited programme/course/stage only · university

4. Producing an AI-developed first draft for assignments or project report (even with due acknowledgement) and/or paraphrasing (see Section 5 below) is considered plagiarism and is not permitted. Such actions may entail punitive consequences of cancelling the marks of the assignment. All written works must originate from the student’s own intellectual effort, with AI used only for permitted refinement, clarification, or feedback as outlined in the Sections of “permitted use of AI” in this policy. Permission could be granted to use AI tools for students with disabilities to use text to speech, text to image, text to audio / video format for the use of assessments. 5. Paraphrasing AI generated contents manually or with the use of Humaniser tools to ‘humanise’ them, in order to prevent identification of AI generated content or disguise its origin constitutes intentional academic deception and may entail punitive consequences. In a suspected case, authorities may use the submitted assignment of the student to put through suitable AI detectors for idiolect and lexicon analysis without the prior permission of the student.
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 210–223
SHA-256: 5c88c16103c9a390a008c59f51aaa5a11bec5c0dbdc5cd29e127d343e49b1e1a

采集与版本说明

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。

AI 工具与获取方式

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。

存档工具记录;当前获取方式请核对官方来源。 以下获取说明与证据引用保留原文语言。

  • AI tools工具提及;未确认校方提供尚未确认可用性
    获取条件与官方原文
    官方来源 1 ↗

    原文引用

    University of Colombo states that its generative AI policy applies to the use of GenAI tools in academic and administrative activities.
    官方来源 2 ↗

    原文引用

    The policy states that it applies to GenAI tools in academic and administrative activities.

Reviewed record

已审核条款

6 条已审核条款

学术诚信3 条已审核条款

Academic Integrity

University of Colombo says AI use in assessments is not permitted unless instructions explicitly authorize it, and unauthorized AI use in summative assessment is considered cheating and an examination offence.

审核: 智能体已审核置信度96%

标准化值: Unauthorized AI use in assessments is prohibited and may be treated as cheating.

原始证据

证据 1
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.

本地化显示 only

AI use in assessments is prohibited unless explicitly authorized, and unauthorized summative-assessment AI use is treated as cheating.

Academic Integrity

University of Colombo requires students and staff to remain responsible for work involving AI and to review, fact-check, and edit AI-generated content before using it in academic or administrative work.

审核: 智能体已审核置信度94%

标准化值: Users remain responsible and must verify AI-generated content before incorporation.

原始证据

证据 1
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.

本地化显示 only

Students and staff remain responsible for AI-assisted work and must review, fact-check, and edit AI-generated content before use.

Academic Integrity

For student work, University of Colombo says AI uses beyond citation/reference generation and accessibility support must be explicitly acknowledged, and that the original intellectual work, analysis, interpretation, and synthesis must be the student's own.

审核: 智能体已审核置信度93%

标准化值: Student AI use beyond specified no-declaration uses requires acknowledgement and student-owned intellectual work.

原始证据

证据 1
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.

本地化显示 only

Student AI use beyond specified no-declaration uses must be acknowledged, and original intellectual work must remain the student's own.

教学1 条已审核条款

教学

For teaching, University of Colombo says AI tools must not be used to mark or grade student work, generate evaluative feedback, or contribute to summative assessment decisions unless institutional review, validation, quality assurance, and meaningful human oversight are in place.

审核: 智能体已审核置信度92%

标准化值: AI marking or evaluative feedback requires institutional review, validation, QA, and human oversight.

原始证据

证据 1
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.

本地化显示 only

AI marking, feedback, or summative assessment support is not allowed unless institutional review, validation, quality assurance, and human oversight are in place.

隐私1 条已审核条款

隐私

University of Colombo prohibits students and staff from uploading or sharing sensitive, confidential, or personally identifiable information into AI tools or online platforms.

审核: 智能体已审核置信度95%

标准化值: Sensitive, confidential, or personally identifiable information must not be uploaded or shared into AI tools.

原始证据

证据 1
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.

本地化显示 only

Students and staff must not upload or share sensitive, confidential, or personally identifiable information into AI tools or online platforms.

AI 工具使用规则1 条已审核条款

Ai Tool Treatment

University of Colombo states that its generative AI policy applies to the use of GenAI tools in academic and administrative activities.

审核: 智能体已审核置信度95%

标准化值: GenAI policy applies to academic and administrative activities.

原始证据

证据 1
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.

本地化显示 only

The policy states that it applies to GenAI tools in academic and administrative activities.

Source record

官方来源

3 个来源

展开官方来源列表
记录信息、JSON 与引用
审核AI 辅助审核置信度96%快照状态未发布JSON公开 JSON

Citation: University AI Policy Tracker. "University of Colombo AI Policy Tracker record." Last checked May 23, 2026. https://eduaipolicy.org/universities/university-of-colombo

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.