Teaching & Learning
- Using AI beyond those stated limits is treated as academic misconduct
- Students may use AI tools in coursework only within the limits set by the instructor for the specific assignment
- The policy frames unauthorized AI use as a form of cheating or plagiarism and requires students to follow assignment-specific rules
The use of AI-generated text and computer-generated code in coursework is only permitted if and to the extent explicitly allowed by the instructor responsible for the assessment.
Any use beyond this permission constitutes an attempt to deceive and is therefore considered academic misconduct.
Academic misconduct includes, but is not limited to, cheating, plagiarism, fabrication, facilitating academic dishonesty, and unauthorized use of artificial intelligence tools.
Students are expected to complete all assessed work honestly and independently unless collaboration or AI use is explicitly authorized.
- Violations are handled as academic misconduct
- AI use in examinations is prohibited unless it is explicitly authorized for that assessment
- The written-examinations rules prohibit unauthorized aids, and the academic integrity policy separately states that AI use is only allowed when expressly permitted by the instructor
During the examination, only those aids explicitly authorized by the examiner may be used.
The use of AI-generated text and computer-generated code in coursework is only permitted if and to the extent explicitly allowed by the instructor responsible for the assessment.
Any use beyond this permission constitutes an attempt to deceive and is therefore considered academic misconduct.
- A separate code of conduct also expects users to verify AI outputs and not rely on them blindly
- Any use that carries into assessed work remains subject to instructor authorization and academic integrity requirements
- The university encourages critical and ethically responsible engagement with AI in learning contexts, but it does not set a standalone university-wide rule specifically governing personal study assistance
Constructor University recognizes that emerging tools such as generative artificial intelligence can support learning and creativity, but their use must align with the principles of honesty, fairness, transparency, and accountability.
Students are expected to engage critically with all sources and tools, including AI systems, and to ensure that any submitted work truthfully reflects their own understanding and contribution.
Always verify AI-generated output for accuracy, bias, and appropriateness before relying on it.
Do not represent AI-generated content as your own original work where attribution or disclosure is required.
- Unauthorized use is classified as academic misconduct
- The policy applies to coding assignments as part of coursework and assessments
- Computer-generated code is treated the same way as AI-generated text: it is only allowed for assessed work when the instructor explicitly permits it and only to the extent permitted
The use of AI-generated text and computer-generated code in coursework is only permitted if and to the extent explicitly allowed by the instructor responsible for the assessment.
Any use beyond this permission constitutes an attempt to deceive and is therefore considered academic misconduct.
Research
- The policy expressly forbids listing AI tools as authors
- The candidate remains fully responsible for the content, originality, and accuracy of the work
- For doctoral work, AI-assisted writing or editing may be used only with supervisor approval and only when fully disclosed in the thesis
The use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools (e.g., for language editing or text generation) in the preparation of a doctoral thesis must be disclosed in an appropriate manner.
Doctoral candidates may only use such tools with the prior consent of their supervisor(s).
The candidate remains solely responsible for the content, originality, and accuracy of the thesis.
Artificial intelligence tools cannot be named as authors or co-authors of a doctoral thesis.
- General research-integrity expectations apply, but no explicit AI rule for these activities is stated in the provided documents
- The reviewed sources do not define a specific university policy on using AI for research data collection, analysis, statistical processing, synthetic data generation, or interpretation of results
not defined
- For doctoral research, the university requires disclosure and prior supervisory consent for generative AI use in thesis preparation, while making the candidate solely responsible for the thesis
- More broadly, research at Constructor University must follow good research practice and honest reporting standards, though the provided research-integrity statute does not set AI-specific rules for grant proposals or ethics applications
The use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools (e.g., for language editing or text generation) in the preparation of a doctoral thesis must be disclosed in an appropriate manner.
Doctoral candidates may only use such tools with the prior consent of their supervisor(s).
The candidate remains solely responsible for the content, originality, and accuracy of the thesis.
scientific work must be carried out lege artis in accordance with the current state of knowledge and in compliance with the relevant legal regulations and accepted ethical standards.
Results must be documented honestly, consistently and in a comprehensible manner.
Academic Integrity
- For ordinary coursework, the provided sources focus on permission from instructors rather than a university-wide citation format for AI use
- The university requires transparency when AI is used in doctoral thesis preparation, including appropriate disclosure and supervisor consent
- The broader conduct policy also requires attribution or disclosure where required and warns against presenting AI-generated content as one's own
The use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools (e.g., for language editing or text generation) in the preparation of a doctoral thesis must be disclosed in an appropriate manner.
Doctoral candidates may only use such tools with the prior consent of their supervisor(s).
Do not represent AI-generated content as your own original work where attribution or disclosure is required.
- The provided sources do not define a position on AI-detection software specifically
- Undisclosed or unauthorized AI use is enforced through the university's academic misconduct framework
- The policy explicitly states that using AI beyond instructor permission is an attempt to deceive, and misconduct cases are subject to university procedures and sanctions
Any use beyond this permission constitutes an attempt to deceive and is therefore considered academic misconduct.
Academic misconduct includes, but is not limited to, cheating, plagiarism, fabrication, facilitating academic dishonesty, and unauthorized use of artificial intelligence tools.
Violations of academic integrity are subject to investigation and sanctions in accordance with university regulations.
Institutional & Administrative
- While the code of conduct includes general expectations for responsible AI use, it does not set a detailed faculty/staff operational policy in the materials reviewed
- The provided sources do not define a specific policy on faculty or staff use of AI for grading, feedback, lesson planning, recommendation letters, or administrative communications
not defined
- The reviewed materials do not identify a list of approved AI platforms or a formal tiered data-classification scheme for AI use
- The university's code of conduct requires users to protect confidential, personal, and sensitive information when using AI and not to enter such data into tools without authorization
Do not input confidential, personal, or sensitive university information into AI systems unless explicitly authorized and compliant with applicable data protection laws.
Respect intellectual property, privacy, and data protection obligations when using AI tools.
- The available governance is principles-based rather than a detailed strategic framework
- The provided materials do not define a formal AI strategy, committee structure, roadmap, or dedicated AI governance body
- Constructor University has articulated general institutional principles for AI use centered on honesty, fairness, transparency, accountability, privacy, and human responsibility
Constructor University recognizes that emerging tools such as generative artificial intelligence can support learning and creativity, but their use must align with the principles of honesty, fairness, transparency, and accountability.
Users of AI tools are responsible for ensuring that outputs are accurate, appropriate, and compliant with university policies and applicable law.
Respect intellectual property, privacy, and data protection obligations when using AI tools.
DocuMark: Responsible AI Use for Academic Integrity
Knowing your institution's AI policy is step one. DocuMark helps enforce it fairly by empowering universities to manage AI-generated content, prevent cheating, and support student writing through responsible AI use.
Common Questions About Constructor University (Bremen)'s AI Policies
Constructor University (Bremen) has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
The university requires transparency when AI is used in doctoral thesis preparation, including appropriate disclosure and supervisor consent. The broader conduct policy also requires attribution or disclosure where required and warns against presenting AI-generated content as one's own. For ordinary coursework, the provided sources focus on permission from instructors rather than a university-wide citation format for AI use.
Undisclosed or unauthorized AI use is enforced through the university's academic misconduct framework. The policy explicitly states that using AI beyond instructor permission is an attempt to deceive, and misconduct cases are subject to university procedures and sanctions. The provided sources do not define a position on AI-detection software specifically.
The university's code of conduct requires users to protect confidential, personal, and sensitive information when using AI and not to enter such data into tools without authorization. The reviewed materials do not identify a list of approved AI platforms or a formal tiered data-classification scheme for AI use.