Teaching & Learning
- Use of generative AI in coursework is not uniformly allowed or banned across the university; it depends on the assessment design and the module leader’s instructions
- Students may use AI only where the assessment brief permits it, and they remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, and proper acknowledgement of any AI-supported work
Use of AI in assessments
Sometimes. It all depends on the specific assessment, and your lecturers’ instructions. If the use of AI is explicitly allowed, then you can use it. If it is not expressly permitted, use should be assumed to be against the rules.
Remember that while AI tools can support your learning and work, over-reliance and limited critical engagement can impede your learning. Their use should not compromise your ability to think independently and act with academic integrity.
You should always be prepared to answer questions about your work and explain how AI has been used and how you checked the information for relevance and accuracy.
Where AI use is allowed, your lecturer will tell you how you should acknowledge it. They may ask you to:
• provide the prompts or inputs that you used to generate output from AI tools, either in the main body of the work, in footnotes, or in appendices;
• provide examples or extracts of the output generated by AI tools, either in the main body of the work, in footnotes, or in appendices;
• indicate which parts of your work were supported by AI tools using a note, footnote or in-text statement;
• include a full bibliographic reference in your references list for each AI tool used;
• complete and submit a statement to show where and how AI has been used in an assignment.
- The university treats AI use in assessments as assessment-specific and instructor-directed
- If AI use is not expressly permitted in an assessment, students should assume it is not allowed, and the university may use oral questioning or live presentations to verify student authorship and understanding
Use of AI in assessments
Sometimes. It all depends on the specific assessment, and your lecturers’ instructions. If the use of AI is explicitly allowed, then you can use it. If it is not expressly permitted, use should be assumed to be against the rules.
For all AI-supported assessments, programme and module teams should consider adapting or introducing methods to verify authorship and support originality and student learning, such as:
• oral questioning as part of in-class or online presentations, practical performances or demonstrations;
• requiring students to submit key stages or drafts of assessed work, together with oral or other feedback from tutors to support the assessment process;
• use of in-class tests and assessments to complement online and other take-home work in the assessment diet.
- The guidance stresses that students must critically evaluate outputs, protect personal data, and avoid over-reliance so that independent thinking and learning are not undermined
- Students are encouraged to use AI cautiously as a study support tool for tasks such as brainstorming, clarifying ideas, generating quiz questions, planning work, and checking wording
Can I use generative AI in my studies?
Yes – with caution and critically.
Generative AI tools like ChatGPT can help with some parts of your academic work. They can support understanding, planning and creativity, but they can also make mistakes, be biased or produce misleading information. This means you need to use them carefully, and always apply your own judgement.
Some ways students use AI tools include:
• getting another explanation of a difficult topic or idea
• generating quiz questions to test understanding
• asking for help with planning an essay or report
• getting feedback on writing, such as grammar or clarity
• brainstorming ideas for a project or presentation
• summarising long articles or notes.
AI can be useful for starting points, but it should not replace your own work or critical thinking.
Never enter confidential, personal or sensitive information into an AI tool.
Anything you type may be stored, reused or analysed.
You should always be prepared to answer questions about your work and explain how AI has been used and how you checked the information for relevance and accuracy.
- The university provides no explicit university-wide rule specific to AI code generation for programming assignments
- General assessment rules still apply: students may use AI only where expressly permitted in the assessment and must follow module-level instructions
Use of AI in assessments
Sometimes. It all depends on the specific assessment, and your lecturers’ instructions. If the use of AI is explicitly allowed, then you can use it. If it is not expressly permitted, use should be assumed to be against the rules.
Research
- AI tools cannot be credited as authors, and any use must be transparent where relevant and consistent with publisher, funder, and disciplinary requirements
- Researchers may use AI tools to support drafting and editing, but they remain fully responsible for the final content, accuracy, originality, and integrity of research outputs
Researchers are responsible for all content submitted for publication, funding or assessment, including anything developed with the support of generative AI tools.
Generative AI tools should not be listed as authors because they cannot take responsibility for the work.
If generative AI has been used in preparing a manuscript or other research output, researchers should follow the disclosure requirements of the relevant publisher, funder or professional body.
Researchers should critically evaluate and verify the accuracy, reliability and originality of outputs generated by AI tools before using them in any scholarly work.
- AI use in research data and analysis is allowed only with careful oversight and in line with legal, ethical, and disciplinary requirements
- Researchers must verify outputs, consider risks such as bias and fabrication, and must not upload confidential, personal, or sensitive research data into public AI tools unless approved safeguards are in place
Researchers should critically evaluate and verify the accuracy, reliability and originality of outputs generated by AI tools before using them in any scholarly work.
Researchers must not enter confidential, personal, sensitive or commercially restricted information into publicly available AI tools unless appropriate safeguards and approvals are in place.
Use of AI in research must comply with data protection, intellectual property, confidentiality and research ethics requirements.
Researchers should consider the risks of bias, fabrication, lack of traceability and poor reproducibility when using AI tools for data analysis, interpretation or synthesis.
- The university requires AI use in research to comply with research ethics, integrity, and governance standards
- Researchers must consider ethical, confidentiality, and reproducibility risks, and the university’s research misconduct and integrity framework applies to AI-supported research activity
Use of AI in research must comply with data protection, intellectual property, confidentiality and research ethics requirements.
Researchers should consider the risks of bias, fabrication, lack of traceability and poor reproducibility when using AI tools for data analysis, interpretation or synthesis.
The University expects all researchers to uphold the highest standards of honesty, rigour, transparency and accountability in the conduct of research.
Research misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, misrepresentation and failure to comply with legal, ethical and professional obligations in conducting research.
Academic Integrity
- The exact disclosure method is determined by the lecturer or assessment instructions, and the university also provides a dedicated referencing guide for generative AI
- When AI use is allowed, students may be required to disclose how they used it, provide prompts and outputs, identify which parts were AI-supported, and include references for the AI tools used
Where AI use is allowed, your lecturer will tell you how you should acknowledge it. They may ask you to:
• provide the prompts or inputs that you used to generate output from AI tools, either in the main body of the work, in footnotes, or in appendices;
• provide examples or extracts of the output generated by AI tools, either in the main body of the work, in footnotes, or in appendices;
• indicate which parts of your work were supported by AI tools using a note, footnote or in-text statement;
• include a full bibliographic reference in your references list for each AI tool used;
• complete and submit a statement to show where and how AI has been used in an assignment.
If you use content generated by AI, you should reference it clearly and follow any guidance given by your lecturer or module handbook.
- Undisclosed or unauthorized AI use can be treated as academic misconduct under university integrity rules
- Rather than relying solely on automated detection, the university emphasizes assessment design and verification methods such as oral questioning, draft submission, and in-class assessment to support authorship checks
If the use of AI is explicitly allowed, then you can use it. If it is not expressly permitted, use should be assumed to be against the rules.
Presenting work generated by AI as your own, where this is not allowed, may be considered academic misconduct.
For all AI-supported assessments, programme and module teams should consider adapting or introducing methods to verify authorship and support originality and student learning, such as:
• oral questioning as part of in-class or online presentations, practical performances or demonstrations;
• requiring students to submit key stages or drafts of assessed work, together with oral or other feedback from tutors to support the assessment process;
• use of in-class tests and assessments to complement online and other take-home work in the assessment diet.
Institutional & Administrative
- AI should not replace academic decision-making, and staff remain responsible for the accuracy, fairness, and appropriateness of outputs such as feedback, communications, and appraisal materials
- Faculty and staff may use AI to support teaching, administration, and appraisal-related work, but they must exercise professional judgment, verify outputs, and protect confidential or personal data
Staff can use AI tools to support teaching, learning design, administration and communication, but must do so responsibly and in line with University policies.
You remain responsible for the accuracy, appropriateness and integrity of any content produced with the support of AI.
Do not enter personal, confidential or sensitive information into publicly available AI tools.
AI should be used to support, not replace, professional judgement.
AI can help with drafting objectives, reflecting on achievements and preparing for conversations, but it should not replace honest self-assessment or meaningful dialogue between appraiser and appraisee.
Any content generated with AI should be reviewed carefully to make sure it is accurate, relevant and appropriate.
- The university prohibits entering personal, confidential, sensitive, or commercially restricted information into publicly available AI tools unless safeguards and approvals are in place
- Its AI guidance consistently ties AI use to institutional policy compliance on data protection, confidentiality, intellectual property, and information governance, but it does not define a single approved-platform list in the cited text
Never enter confidential, personal or sensitive information into an AI tool.
Anything you type may be stored, reused or analysed.
Do not enter personal, confidential or sensitive information into publicly available AI tools.
Researchers must not enter confidential, personal, sensitive or commercially restricted information into publicly available AI tools unless appropriate safeguards and approvals are in place.
Use of AI in research must comply with data protection, intellectual property, confidentiality and research ethics requirements.
- The university has an institution-level AI guidance framework covering students, teaching, research, administration, and appraisal
- Its overall approach is to support responsible use of AI while requiring human judgment, integrity, transparency, and compliance with existing university policies and governance requirements
This guidance brings together information on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) at the University of Greenwich for students, teaching staff, researchers and professional services colleagues.
The University of Greenwich supports the responsible and ethical use of AI to enhance learning, teaching, research and administration.
AI should be used to support, not replace, human judgement.
Use of AI must align with existing University policies, including those relating to academic integrity, data protection, information security, equality, research ethics and professional conduct.
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 Greenwich's AI Policies
University of Greenwich has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
When AI use is allowed, students may be required to disclose how they used it, provide prompts and outputs, identify which parts were AI-supported, and include references for the AI tools used. The exact disclosure method is determined by the lecturer or assessment instructions, and the university also provides a dedicated referencing guide for generative AI.
Undisclosed or unauthorized AI use can be treated as academic misconduct under university integrity rules. Rather than relying solely on automated detection, the university emphasizes assessment design and verification methods such as oral questioning, draft submission, and in-class assessment to support authorship checks.
The university prohibits entering personal, confidential, sensitive, or commercially restricted information into publicly available AI tools unless safeguards and approvals are in place. Its AI guidance consistently ties AI use to institutional policy compliance on data protection, confidentiality, intellectual property, and information governance, but it does not define a single approved-platform list in the cited text.