Teaching & Learning
- Where GenAI use is not permitted or is used beyond the stated allowance, it is treated as academic misconduct
- Use of generative AI in coursework and assignments is set at assessment level by staff, not uniformly allowed or banned across the university
- The assessment code provides a scale ranging from no GenAI use to full co-creation, and staff must specify in the assessment brief which level is permitted
Staff should refer to this ‘Using AI in Assessment Scale’ and decide which type of Generative AI usage is permitted in each assessment they set. The relevant description of that generative AI use should then be added to the Assessment Brief, alongside the appropriate referencing requirements.
Type of GenAI Use Permitted in Assessment*
* Staff should refer to the ‘Using AI in Assessment’ annex within the Assessment and Feedback Code of Practice and decide which type of Generative AI usage is permitted in this specific assessment
First offence of unpermitted use of
generative artificial intelligence
tools in the production of an
assignment.
- For controlled assessments such as invigilated exams, GenAI is not permitted except for in-built spelling and grammar checking
- The code also states that all students may use assistive AI for spelling, grammar, and punctuation in written assessments, but this excludes examinations and class tests unless staff advise otherwise
No GenAI use
permitted
[Note: this option is
only applicable under
controlled assessment
conditions (e.g.,
invigilated exams)]
You are not permitted to use GenAI at
any point during this assessment except
for checking of spelling and grammar
using the in-built technology (i.e., the
spelling and grammar checker in Word).
You must undertake the assessment
based solely on your knowledge and
skills
Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI):
All students can use assistive AI tools to check spelling, grammar and punctuation (i.e., use
of in-built spell checkers) in all written assessments excluding examinations and class tests,
unless advised otherwise.
- The university provides learning support on appropriate student use of generative AI and explicitly points students to guidance and workshops
- Library guidance presents AI as useful for learning and revision when used critically, with emphasis on understanding tool limits, fact-checking outputs, and using AI to support rather than replace student learning
Students can get help and advice on how to improve their academic practice and skills by
visiting the Academic Skills team’s (Library Education Centre)web page where they can
access online resources, 1:1 support, and workshops including dedicated resources to
help you to use generative AI tools appropriately and to answer questions such as, “When
should and shouldn’t I use Generative AI?”.
It can be really useful for finding those blind spots within your current knowledge that you can then move into adapting with, so questions that you may have surprised you during an exam, you may have already dealt with before because you have already got that “conversation” with the AI at that point.
The first rule is to always make sure that you know the real strengths and limitations of that tool before you use it.
The second rule that I think is really important is to use those generative AI tools critically as well.
And the third rule I'd recommend is to always use any generative AI tool actively.
Research
- For research degree theses or published work, unpermitted use of generative AI is treated as academic misconduct
- Beyond that prohibition on unpermitted use, the provided research documents do not set out a specific university-wide allowance or process for using AI to draft or edit research manuscripts
Major plagiarism in a research
degree thesis or published work.
Unpermitted use of generative
artificial intelligence tools in the
production of the research degree
thesis or published work.
- The IT policy also requires Keele data, including research data, to be stored only on Keele-owned cloud services unless specific approval is obtained
- The research code requires researchers to act honestly and use appropriate methods for data handling and analysis, but it does not state any AI-specific permissions or restrictions for research data or analysis
1 - Honesty - all researchers must be honest in all aspects of research and in response to the actions
of others, including when applying for research funding, analysing data, reporting research findings,
acknowledging the contributions of others and reporting cases of suspected misconduct. Plagiarism
and academic dishonesty must be avoided.
2 - Rigour - all researchers must ensure that they are using the most appropriate methods, follow any
agreed protocols, including for data handling and analysis, and take care at all stages of the research
process.
• Storing Keele data and information; electronic files, extracts, research data for example, on any
Cloud based service or personal device (data must be stored on Keele owned Cloud services such as
Teams, OneDrive, AWS or Azure Cloud) unless with specific and directed approval from the Data
Protection Officer or Information and Digital Services.
- The university's research code applies to all people conducting research on behalf of Keele and requires honesty, ethical consideration, and accountability
- It provides that research misconduct investigations must be handled through the Research Misconduct Procedure, and the student misconduct code specifically treats unpermitted AI use in research theses or published work as misconduct
The University shall ensure that all investigations into the conduct of research are managed through
a robust, transparent and fair process as detailed in the Research Misconduct Procedure.
This Code of Good Research Practice applies to all people who conduct research on behalf of Keele
University, this includes staff, independent contractors, consultants, students, visiting or emeritus
staff, volunteers and those with honorary contracts.
1 - Honesty - all researchers must be honest in all aspects of research and in response to the actions
of others, including when applying for research funding, analysing data, reporting research findings,
acknowledging the contributions of others and reporting cases of suspected misconduct. Plagiarism
and academic dishonesty must be avoided.
4 - Care and respect - for all participants, subjects, beneficiaries and users of research including
humans, animals, the environment and cultural objects. All researchers must consider the ethical
implications of their research.
Major plagiarism in a research
degree thesis or published work.
Unpermitted use of generative
artificial intelligence tools in the
production of the research degree
thesis or published work.
Academic Integrity
- When AI use is permitted, students are required to disclose and reference that use
- The exact disclosure requirement depends on the assessment type, but the code repeatedly requires acknowledgement before the reference list or clear referencing of AI-generated parts, and presentations must state how and where GenAI was used
Students will also find resources around how
to reference the use of AI in assessments where it is permitted to do so.
At the end of your work and
before your reference list you
must acknowledge your use of
GenAI.
You must clearly reference any
AI-generated parts of the
assessment submission as per
the guidance on referencing
Generative AI via Cite them
Right.
At the end of a
presentation you must clearly
state how and where GenAI has
been used in that presentation.
- No explicit policy on AI detection tools is defined in the provided sources
- The university explicitly enforces against unpermitted AI use through its academic misconduct process
- Penalties stated in the code include a written warning and a mark of zero for an assessment unit for a first major offence, with escalation up to termination of studies for repeated offences
In cases of suspected or proven academic misconduct, the University can
investigate previously marked work.
First offence of unpermitted use of
generative artificial intelligence
tools in the production of an
assignment.
Penalty for major offence.
(in taught and research degrees
apart from research degree thesis
or published work).
The issue of a written warning for academic misconduct
plus allocation of a mark of zero for the assessment unit
in question and with the normal consequences, if any,
for reassessment.
Termination of studies with a bar on any future enrolment
with the University.
Institutional & Administrative
- The provided sources do not define broader university-wide rules for staff use of AI in grading, recommendation letters, or administrative communications
- Staff have a defined role in deciding what kind of GenAI use is permitted in each assessment and in communicating that in the assessment brief, including any referencing requirements
[Staff should refer to the ‘Using AI in Assessment’ annex within the Assessment and
Feedback Code of Practice and decide which type of Generative AI usage is permitted in this
specific assessment
Staff should refer to this ‘Using AI in Assessment Scale’ and decide which type of Generative AI usage
is permitted in each assessment they set. The relevant description of that generative AI use should
then be added to the Assessment Brief, alongside the appropriate referencing requirements.
- The IT Acceptable Use Policy applies when users employ third-party systems, including large language models, for university duties or studies
- It does not name approved AI platforms, but it requires Keele data, including research data, to be stored on Keele-owned cloud services unless specific approval is granted, and it prohibits using AI or other large language models for malicious purposes against or from Keele IT resources
• Use 3rd party IT Systems in connection with their official University duties or studies (e.g. social
media, Large Language Models (AI)).
• Storing Keele data and information; electronic files, extracts, research data for example, on any
Cloud based service or personal device (data must be stored on Keele owned Cloud services such as
Teams, OneDrive, AWS or Azure Cloud) unless with specific and directed approval from the Data
Protection Officer or Information and Digital Services.
• Using Artificial Intelligence, or other Large Language Models for malicious purposes against or from
Keele IT resources.
• Data Classification and Handling Policy
• Data Protection Policy
• Information Governance Framework
• Information Security Policy
- The provided sources do not describe a broader university-wide AI committee or full AI strategy beyond these governance documents and structures
- Keele has an institution-level Generative AI in Education Framework and its assessment code says assessment practice should be informed by sector best practice on GenAI
- For research, the university states that research integrity is one of the seven focal pillars of its Research Strategy and that it will promote integrity through a Research Integrity Champions Network
Approval Date: 17 June 2025
Date of next review: 17 June 2028
Document Type: Framework
Themes: Academic Regulations and Policies (KARP), Information Technology, Research
• Ensure that assessment practices are current and informed by sector best practice, in
particular, in relation to the use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) in learning,
teaching and assessment.
Research integrity is one of the seven focal pillars of Keele
University’s Research Strategy, with a commitment to continue embedding a positive culture of
research integrity and reproducibility.
The university shall promote research integrity through establishing a Research Integrity Champions
Network that spans the whole university, hosting regular research integrity and reproducibility
themed talks, celebrating examples of good research practice and sharing examples of failures to help
prevent them reoccurring in the future.
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 Keele's AI Policies
University of Keele has defined AI policies in 11 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 92%.
When AI use is permitted, students are required to disclose and reference that use. The exact disclosure requirement depends on the assessment type, but the code repeatedly requires acknowledgement before the reference list or clear referencing of AI-generated parts, and presentations must state how and where GenAI was used.
The university explicitly enforces against unpermitted AI use through its academic misconduct process. Penalties stated in the code include a written warning and a mark of zero for an assessment unit for a first major offence, with escalation up to termination of studies for repeated offences. No explicit policy on AI detection tools is defined in the provided sources.
The IT Acceptable Use Policy applies when users employ third-party systems, including large language models, for university duties or studies. It does not name approved AI platforms, but it requires Keele data, including research data, to be stored on Keele-owned cloud services unless specific approval is granted, and it prohibits using AI or other large language models for malicious purposes against or from Keele IT resources.