Teaching & Learning
- For assessed coursework, the university treats unauthorized use of generative AI as academic misconduct when a student presents AI-generated material as their own
- The university also states that whether AI may be used in an assessment depends on the specific assignment brief, which must indicate if and how AI tools are permitted
Academic misconduct is when a student acts dishonestly, unfairly or irresponsibly in relation to their studies. It includes, but is not limited to, the following behaviours where a student knowingly: ... submits work for assessment that was not generated by the student, for example, where an artificial intelligence tool or another person has produced some or all of the work and the student has not been given permission to use the artificial intelligence tool or present another person's work as their own ...
As a student, it is your responsibility to understand how these AI tools can impact your learning, and how their use can have serious consequences if not used correctly. If you're unsure about using AI, discuss your concerns with your lecturer.
It is important to carefully review your assignment brief and supporting learning materials, as these should indicate if and how AI tools can be used. Your lecturers should also discuss your use of AI tools and the impact these may have on your learning.
- The university does not set a blanket rule permitting AI in all assessments
- Instead, AI use in assessments is governed by the assignment brief or exam instructions, and using AI without permission in submitted assessment work is treated as academic misconduct
submits work for assessment that was not generated by the student, for example, where an artificial intelligence tool or another person has produced some or all of the work and the student has not been given permission to use the artificial intelligence tool or present another person's work as their own
It is important to carefully review your assignment brief and supporting learning materials, as these should indicate if and how AI tools can be used.
- However, students are told they remain responsible for checking the accuracy of outputs and understanding the limits and risks of these tools
- The university permits students to use AI tools to support learning and study, including finding information, generating ideas, creating study materials, and getting explanations
As a student, there are some ways in which AI tools may be useful in your studies. These could include:
finding and summarising information from multiple sources,
generating ideas and suggestions about your work,
creating personalised study guides, revision notes and quizzes,
explaining concepts and helping you understand difficult topics,
checking and translating text.
Understanding the limits of AI tools
There are several points to remember when using AI in your studies:
AI tools can provide incorrect, biased or misleading information,
the quality of the outputs from these tools depends on the quality of what you ask them to produce,
the use of AI tools can impact the development of your academic skills,
there are serious consequences for using AI tools to cheat in your assessments.
- General assessment rules still apply where AI-generated work is used without permission
- The university provides no explicit AI policy specific to code generation or programming assignments in the supplied sources
not defined
Research
- The university allows generative AI only in limited support roles such as editing for readability and language
- It prohibits using AI to generate content or ideas, to replace a student's own critical thinking, or to create text, figures, images, or data that are then presented as the student's own work
What can generative AI be used for?
• To improve readability and language in a student's own writing.
What should generative AI not be used for?
• To generate or infer content and ideas from source materials.
• To replace critical thinking, the student's own original thought, or interpretation.
• To create images, figures or data and then present these as a student's own work.
• To create, write or produce any work and then present this as a student's own work.
• To make any judgement where understanding and context are required.
- It also states that AI should not be used to make judgments that require understanding and context
- The university prohibits students from using generative AI to create figures or data and then presenting those data as their own work
What should generative AI not be used for?
• To create images, figures or data and then present these as a student's own work.
• To make any judgement where understanding and context are required.
- The university considers the use of generative AI as an academic integrity matter
- It requires any use to be acknowledged, prohibits presenting AI-produced work as a student's own, and warns that using AI may create legal, ethical, and confidentiality risks
The University requires the use of AI to be acknowledged and therefore not be represented as a student's own work.
Students should be aware of the potential legal, ethical and confidentiality concerns surrounding the use of AI.
Academic Integrity
- The university requires students to acknowledge AI use rather than present it as their own work
- It directs students to assignment briefs and lecturers to understand if and how AI tools can be used and disclosed
The University requires the use of AI to be acknowledged and therefore not be represented as a student's own work.
It is important to carefully review your assignment brief and supporting learning materials, as these should indicate if and how AI tools can be used. Your lecturers should also discuss your use of AI tools and the impact these may have on your learning.
- The university states that AI detection tools are unreliable and should not be used alone to prove misconduct
- Suspected cases must be considered through established academic misconduct procedures, and penalties can range from a warning to exclusion depending on severity and level of study
The University does not support the use of AI detection software such as GPTZero, Winston AI, Originality.AI or ZeroGPT, to determine whether a student may have used AI inappropriately in their work. The University will not use the output from any AI detection software as the sole basis for an allegation of academic misconduct.
A finding of academic misconduct against a student can have major consequences in relation to their academic progress and future career. For this reason, all allegations must be carefully considered under the procedures set out in the University's academic misconduct regulations.
A student found guilty of academic misconduct may receive one of the following penalties depending on the severity of the offence: • a warning • a reduction in marks • being required to re-take the assessment with a capped mark • failing the module • exclusion from the University in severe cases
Institutional & Administrative
- The university encourages staff to build capability in AI and offers support for exploring AI in teaching and learning
- The supplied sources do not provide a binding university-wide rule on staff use of AI for grading, feedback, recommendation letters, or administrative communications
Artificial intelligence has the potential to change almost all aspects of our lives and work and it is essential that staff understand and are prepared to utilise these tools.
The Digitally Enabled Education team can support staff to:
better understand the implications of Artificial Intelligence in education
feel more confident in discussing the use of AI tools with students,
identify suitable AI tools,
explore how AI can support students' learning, and
understand the associated risks and challenges.
- Staff must not use Copilot for special category or criminal offence data unless a Data Protection Impact Assessment has first approved that use
- The university has an approved Microsoft 365 Copilot pilot and allows participants to use personal data only when it is necessary, proportionate, and compliant with university information governance rules
All personal data included in Copilot prompts and responses and/or outputs should be minimised and should only be used where necessary and proportionate.
Personal data should be used in Copilot in accordance with the University's Information Governance Policies and Procedures, particularly the Data Protection Policy and the Information Security Policy.
Personal data should not be entered into Copilot for purposes which could equally be achieved using anonymised, pseudonymised or non-personal data.
No special category data or criminal offence data should be entered into Copilot unless a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) has been undertaken and approved by the University prior to the commencement of the processing.
- The university has an institutional direction focused on preparing staff and students to work with AI and on supporting digitally enabled education
- The supplied sources show guidance, support activity, and a formal Copilot pilot, but they do not set out a single overarching university AI governance framework or committee structure
Artificial intelligence has the potential to change almost all aspects of our lives and work and it is essential that staff understand and are prepared to utilise these tools.
At USW, the Digitally Enabled Education team aim to support and encourage lecturers to harness the potential of AI in education.
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 University of Glamorgan's AI Policies
University of Glamorgan has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
The university requires students to acknowledge AI use rather than present it as their own work. It directs students to assignment briefs and lecturers to understand if and how AI tools can be used and disclosed.
The university states that AI detection tools are unreliable and should not be used alone to prove misconduct. Suspected cases must be considered through established academic misconduct procedures, and penalties can range from a warning to exclusion depending on severity and level of study.
The university has an approved Microsoft 365 Copilot pilot and allows participants to use personal data only when it is necessary, proportionate, and compliant with university information governance rules. Staff must not use Copilot for special category or criminal offence data unless a Data Protection Impact Assessment has first approved that use.