London, United Kingdom

University of Greenwich

本站使用指南

辨案件类别及正确复核路线。

授课程序按本评估许可,并在要求时声明;Category 1/调查面谈与 AOP 申诉不同,原文 calendar days 排除学校关门日。

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

授课程序按本评估许可,并在要求时声明;Category 1/调查面谈与 AOP 申诉不同,原文 calendar days 排除学校关门日。

Identify the category and the correct review route. 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: 信息性

本站解读

授课专业程序把 AI 作品、分析/评价/计算及复制/改写 GenAI 文本列为违规,除非本评估说明允许,并在要求时适当声明。封面为 v1.02、2025年9月生效、2026年2月批准;URL仍含 v1-1。

适用范围: Taught programmes; postgraduate research has separate procedures · 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 taught-programme procedure treats AI-produced work, AI analysis/evaluation/calculations and copied or paraphrased GenAI text as misconduct unless the assessment specification permits it and it is appropriately declared if required. The file’s cover says v1.02, effective September 2025, approved February 2026; the URL still contains v1-1.

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

3. Definitions 3.1 Any improper activity or behaviour by a student which may give that student, or another student, an unfair academic advantage in assessment is considered to be assessment misconduct. Work submitted by a student for an assessment must always be their own. Assessment misconduct includes but is not limited to: • Attempting to complete any assessment by unfair means; • Using published work without appropriate referencing; • Copying the coursework or time-constrained assessment/examination of another; • Allowing coursework to be used or copied; • Re-using work previously submitted for another course or programme of study; • Submitting or using work generated by another entity as your own, e.g. computer file/program/design/drawings/results; • Submitting work produced in whole or part by Artificial Intelligence (AI) unless i) allowed by the assessment specification, and ii) appropriately declared (if required). • Using AI to undertake analysis, evaluation or calculations, unless i) allowed by the assessment specification, and ii) appropriately declared (if required). • Copying or paraphrasing content created by Generative AI to generate assessment text unless i) allowed by the assessment specification, and ii) appropriately declared (if required).;
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 132–152
SHA-256: 0e9bee8fc990d0b278995973a47e608e354a5df70154dc7be248c8702a45ce13

Effective from September 2025 Document Owner: Assistant Director, Student & Academic Services (Registry) Principal Contact: Jack Beresford-Zahra, Academic Registry Manager, SAS Approving Body: Student Success Board Date of Approval: February 2026 Date Effective From: September 2025 New students Applies to: Continuing students (delete as appropriate) Partner provision Review Date: Every 3 years or earlier where required Version: v1.02
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 6–19
SHA-256: 0e9bee8fc990d0b278995973a47e608e354a5df70154dc7be248c8702a45ce13

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

2025年7月 Assessment and Feedback Policy 要求教师经 VLE 提供 GenAI 引用指南、使用视频及使用声明;这些资源帮助理解,不授予每项评估的全部用法。

适用范围: Staff supporting students 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

The July 2025 Assessment and Feedback Policy requires staff to provide students via the VLE with the GenAI referencing guide, effective-use video and Declaration of AI use. These resources support understanding; they do not grant every use in every assessment.

适用范围: Staff supporting students in assessment · university

31. Staff will provide students with the university’s guide on referencing generative AI, video on using AI effectively and Declaration of AI use via the VLE to support students’ understanding of acceptable AI usage in assessments.
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 306–308
SHA-256: 430f11075e69f4076ca45c5a99a26737297f0926b6e1167ab39d49832127beae

AI 明示条款正式程序规范语气: 信息性

本站解读

怀疑违规 AI 作品时,评阅者通知课程负责人,可与学生讨论以比较学习表现;仍有理由怀疑才填 CP1。怀疑及 CP1 转交不等于认定或自动处分。

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 suspected prohibited AI-generated work, the assessor alerts the module leader and may discuss the work with the student to compare demonstrated learning. A CP1 is completed if reason for suspicion remains. Suspicion and a CP1 referral are not a finding or automatic penalty.

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

5.2 In the case of suspected use of artificial intelligence to generate work in ways that contravene this policy, the assessor will alert the module leader. They may have a conversation with the student to assess whether the learning demonstrated in the assignment is consistent with that demonstrated by the student in person. Where there is still reason to believe that the policy has been contravened, the assessor/module leader will complete a CP1. 5.3 For all other assessments, if the assessor thinks that a student has committed an assessment offence, they must make all reasonable efforts to preserve and retain evidence securely and will complete a CP1.
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 214–222
SHA-256: 0e9bee8fc990d0b278995973a47e608e354a5df70154dc7be248c8702a45ce13

复核与申诉

来源指导正式程序规范语气: 信息性

本站解读

Category 1 或调查面谈处分须于结果通知后7 calendar days 向指定邮箱交申诉;理由为实质程序错误、不合理决定/不相称处分、此前无法提供的实质新信息。9.3称迟交不予考虑且处分保留;1.5同时规定一般期限例外:须提供充分、有说服力的独立证据说明为何无法按期提交。两条同时保留,不等于自动延期或保证迟交申诉一定受理;原文关门日排除仍适用,AOP申诉走另一路线。

Category 1/Investigative Interview appeal · 7 日历日

学生 · 采用此程序时须遵守

学生 · 起算:notification of Category 1 or Investigative Interview outcome

Every weekday and weekend except University closure days, public holidays and Christmas closures.;Clause 1.5 provides a general deadline exception where compelling independent evidence shows why deadlines could not be met. Clause 9.3 separately says statements received after seven calendar days will not be considered and the sanction remains. Retain both without guaranteeing late acceptance or automatic extension; this route excludes AOP appeals.

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

For a Category 1 or Investigative Interview sanction, an appeal statement goes to the stated email within seven calendar days of outcome notification. Grounds are material procedural error, unreasonable decision/disproportionate sanction or substantial previously unavailable information. Clause 9.3 says late statements will not be considered and the sanction will remain. Clause 1.5 generally expects students to meet procedural deadlines unless compelling independent evidence explains why they could not be met. Both provisions are retained; this is not an automatic extension or a guarantee that a late appeal will be accepted. The source’s closure-day exclusion applies, and AOP appeals follow a separate route.

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

条件与例外

Clause 1.5 provides a general deadline exception where compelling independent evidence shows why deadlines could not be met. Clause 9.3 separately says statements received after seven calendar days will not be considered and the sanction remains. Retain both without guaranteeing late acceptance or automatic extension; this route excludes AOP appeals.

9. Review and appeal procedures Review of Category 1 or Investigative Interview outcomes 9.1 Where a sanction is applied following a Category 1 meeting or Investigative Interview outcome the student may appeal the decision on one or more of the following grounds: a) the assessment misconduct process was not applied correctly or parts within it were applied incorrectly, and the resulting procedural error has had a significant negative impact on the decision made; b) that the decision reached was unreasonable and/or a disproportionate sanction has been imposed; c) substantial new material information/evidence is available which they were unable to provide before the outcome was reached. 9.2 The student should be informed of the outcome of their right to appeal. The student must send an appeal statement to the email address given within 7 calendar days of notification of the outcome, consideration will then be given to whether there are sufficient grounds for the case to proceed. 9.3 If the statement is received after 7 calendar days, the student will be informed that their appeal will not be considered, and that the sanction will remain, and the student will be issued with a Completion of Procedures statement including details of the OIA scheme.
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 390–408
SHA-256: 0e9bee8fc990d0b278995973a47e608e354a5df70154dc7be248c8702a45ce13

1.6 All timescales referred to in this document are measured in ‘calendar days’ which means every day of the week including Saturdays and Sundays, except for university closure days such as public holidays and Christmas closures. Full details of term dates and university closures can be found here https://docs.gre.ac.uk/rep/sas/term-dates.
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 82–85
SHA-256: 0e9bee8fc990d0b278995973a47e608e354a5df70154dc7be248c8702a45ce13

1.5 Students are expected to keep to the deadlines within this procedure unless compelling independent evidence is provided to show why deadlines could not be met. The University is also expected to meet our deadlines but there will occasionally be times when we are unable to do so for good reason. If so, the student will be given the reasons and kept informed of progress.
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 77–80
SHA-256: 0e9bee8fc990d0b278995973a47e608e354a5df70154dc7be248c8702a45ce13

来源指导正式程序规范语气: 信息性

本站解读

Assessment Offences Panel 结果另走 Academic Appeal,理由为程序错误、实质新证据、不合理决定或不相称处分;此段仅链接其他程序,未给提交期,不能套用 Category 1 的7日期限。

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

Assessment Offences Panel outcomes use a separate Academic Appeal route with procedural-error, substantial-new-evidence, unreasonable-decision or disproportionate-penalty grounds. This passage links to another procedure and does not give its filing period; the seven-day Category 1 clock is not transferred to AOP.

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

Appeal against an Assessment Offences Panel outcome 9.10 The outcome notification following an Assessment Offences Panel (AOP) will confirm that students may submit an Academic Appeal against the outcome on one or more of the following grounds: a) the Assessment Misconduct process was not applied correctly, and the resulting procedural error has had a significant negative impact on the decision made. b) substantial new evidence has come to light. c) the decision reached was unreasonable based on the available evidence. d) the penalty imposed was disproportionate. Full details of how to submit an Academic Appeal can be found here.
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 444–455
SHA-256: 0e9bee8fc990d0b278995973a47e608e354a5df70154dc7be248c8702a45ce13

来源指导正式程序规范语气: 信息性

本站解读

收到 Completion of Procedures letter 后,符合条件而不满意者可于信件日期起12个月向 OIA 投诉;Greenwich 学生会提供免费独立建议与 advocacy,仍须符合资格及内部程序。

external OIA complaint · 12 天

学生 · 采用此程序时须遵守

学生 · 起算:date of Completion of Procedures letter

Original unit preserved; no calendar calculation performed.;Only the cited route and version; no automatic date calculation.

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

After a Completion of Procedures letter, an eligible dissatisfied student may complain to OIA within twelve months of the letter’s date. Free independent advice and advocacy are available from Greenwich Students’ Union; eligibility and internal stages still matter.

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

13. External adjudication 13.1 If you have been issued with a Completion of Procedures letter and you remain unhappy with the final decision of the University, you may be able to complain to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator. http://www.oiahe.org.uk/. Assessment Misconduct Procedure 9 13.2 You will need to send a Scheme Application Form to the OIA within twelve months of the date of the Completion of Procedures letter. A Scheme Application Form can be downloaded from the OIA website http://www.oiahe.org.uk/. 14. Advice and support Free independent advice and advocacy is available from the Greenwich Students’ Union. Further details can be found at https://www.greenwichsu.co.uk/advice
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 486–502
SHA-256: 0e9bee8fc990d0b278995973a47e608e354a5df70154dc7be248c8702a45ce13

支持与合理调整 · 检测证据

来源指导正式程序规范语气: 信息性检测证据

本站解读

Greenwich 可随机口试核学习;指控须有理由与证据、按 balance of probabilities,由学校举证。其“calendar days”特别排除学校关门日(公共假日及圣诞关闭);未规定检测阈值或自动定案。

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

Greenwich may viva a random sample to check learning; allegations need a reasoned, evidenced decision on the balance of probabilities, with the burden on the University. Its “calendar days” exceptionally exclude University closure days including public holidays and Christmas closures. No detector threshold or automatic finding is given.

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

1.3 The university reserves the right to viva a random sample of students to check that they can demonstrate a level of achievement relating to the assessment criteria consistent with the quality of work they have submitted for assessment. Where this or other factors give rise to allegations of assessment misconduct, they will be considered under this Procedure and may result in a penalty being imposed. 1.4 The standard of proof applied in operating this procedure is the balance of probabilities. This means the investigation needs only to conclude that it is likely that misconduct occurred, rather than requiring that the evidence be indisputable that misconduct has occurred. Decisions must be supported by a rationale and evidence. The burden lies on the university to show, on the balance of probabilities, that the acts constituting the alleged assessment misconduct occurred. 1.5 Students are expected to keep to the deadlines within this procedure unless compelling independent evidence is provided to show why deadlines could not be met. The University is also expected to meet our deadlines but there will occasionally be times when we are unable to do so for good reason. If so, the student will be given the reasons and kept informed of progress. 1.6 All timescales referred to in this document are measured in ‘calendar days’ which means every day of the week including Saturdays and Sundays, except for university closure days such as public holidays and Christmas closures. Full details of term dates and university closures can be found here https://docs.gre.ac.uk/rep/sas/term-dates.
查看官方来源 ↗

采集日期: 2026-10-08 · 65–85
SHA-256: 0e9bee8fc990d0b278995973a47e608e354a5df70154dc7be248c8702a45ce13

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;未确认校方提供在来源适用范围内受限
    获取条件与官方原文
    官方来源 1 ↗

    原文引用

    University of Greenwich student AI guidance encourages students to use AI to aid learning, while telling students to acknowledge AI use in assignments by adding a declaration and not to copy and paste directly from an AI tool for submitted English-language work.
    官方来源 2 ↗

    原文引用

    However, you must not copy and paste directly from an AI tool as your written English is an assessed element of all work written in the English language, and submitted work must always be your own.
    官方来源 3 ↗

    原文引用

    However, you must not copy and paste directly from an AI tool ...

Reviewed record

已审核条款

5 条已审核条款

学术诚信1 条已审核条款

Academic Integrity

The University of Greenwich 2025 Assessment and Feedback Policy says staff will provide students with the university guide on referencing generative AI, a video on using AI effectively, and the Declaration of AI use via the VLE to support understanding of acceptable AI usage in assessments.

审核: 智能体已审核置信度95%

标准化值: staff_provide_genai_reference_guide_video_and_ai_declaration_vle

原始证据

证据 1
Staff will provide students with the university’s guide on referencing generative AI, video on using AI effectively and Declaration of AI use via the VLE to support students’ understanding of acceptable AI usage in assessments.

本地化显示 only

Staff will provide students with the university guide on referencing generative AI, a video on using AI effectively, and the Declaration of AI use via the VLE.

教学1 条已审核条款

教学

The University of Greenwich 2025 Assessment and Feedback Policy says assessment will be designed to maintain integrity and standards where students have access to generative AI, and encourages staff to incorporate generative AI as a learning tool while facilitating responsible student use.

审核: 智能体已审核置信度94%

标准化值: assessment_design_integrity_standards_with_student_genai_access

原始证据

证据 1
Learning technologies shall be used with consideration of potential biases and limitations of automation. Assessment will be designed to ensure that integrity and standards are maintained where students have access to generative AI, without sacrificing the importance of authenticity of assessment and pedagogic practice. Staff are encouraged to incorporate generative AI as a learning tool and equally facilitate responsible AI usage from students.

本地化显示 only

Assessment will be designed to ensure integrity and standards are maintained where students have access to generative AI, and staff are encouraged to incorporate generative AI as a learning tool while facilitating responsible student use.

隐私1 条已审核条款

隐私

For students who opt to use Studiosity, University of Greenwich says it processes personal data including name, email, course, student ID, and content of interactions with Studiosity tutors, and that Studiosity is an independent data controller based in Australia.

审核: 智能体已审核置信度93%

标准化值: studiosity_privacy_notice_data_fields_and_independent_controller

原始证据

证据 1
The University of Greenwich processes the following personal data about you if you opt to use the Studiosity service: First name, last name, email address; Course; Student ID; Content of your interactions with Studiosity tutors ... Studiosity is an independent data controller based in Australia.

本地化显示 only

For opted-in Studiosity users, Greenwich lists personal data including name, email, course, student ID, and interaction content, and says Studiosity is an independent data controller based in Australia.

AI 工具使用规则2 条已审核条款

Ai Tool Treatment

University of Greenwich student AI guidance encourages students to use AI to aid learning, while telling students to acknowledge AI use in assignments by adding a declaration and not to copy and paste directly from an AI tool for submitted English-language work.

审核: 智能体已审核置信度93%

标准化值: student_ai_learning_use_with_declaration_and_no_direct_copy_paste

原始证据

证据 1
We encourage you to use AI in your studies ... However, you must not copy and paste directly from an AI tool as your written English is an assessed element of all work written in the English language, and submitted work must always be your own. ... If you use AI in the process of undertaking your assignment, for example to create an outline of your assignment or to summarize articles, you should acknowledge this by adding a declaration at the end of your work.

本地化显示 only

We encourage you to use AI in your studies ... However, you must not copy and paste directly from an AI tool ... If you use AI in the process of undertaking your assignment ... you should acknowledge this by adding a declaration at the end of your work.

Ai Tool Treatment

University of Greenwich describes Studiosity+ as an online service for eligible Greenwich students that uses AI to generate academic-writing feedback, with AI trained by subject specialists and feedback monitored by specialists.

审核: 智能体已审核置信度91%

标准化值: studiosity_plus_ai_writing_feedback_supported_service

原始证据

证据 1
The University has teamed up with Studiosity+ to bring you an online service that can help improve your academic writing skills. Studiosity+ will allow you to upload almost complete drafts of your essays, reports and other written assessment types. Studiosity+ uses AI to generate feedback on your writing. The AI has been trained by subject specialists, and specialists monitor the feedback you receive.

本地化显示 only

Studiosity+ is described as an online academic-writing support service that uses AI to generate writing feedback, with AI trained by subject specialists and feedback monitored by specialists.

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95%快照状态未发布JSON公开 JSON

Citation: University AI Policy Tracker. "University of Greenwich AI Policy Tracker record." Last checked May 20, 2026. https://eduaipolicy.org/universities/university-of-greenwich

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.