Teaching & Learning
- For taught students, AI use in coursework is not universally allowed or banned; it depends on the assessment and module guidance
- In the Leeds University Business School policy, students are told that unless an assessment brief says otherwise, generative AI use is not permitted in assessed work
- Students may use generative AI only where this is explicitly permitted, must follow the specific rules given for the assignment, and remain responsible for the submitted work
The use of AI in your assessments may or may not be acceptable. Whether and how AI can be used depends on the type and purpose of the assessment and how the school/module leader has designed the assessment.
If AI use is allowed, your tutor or school will provide guidance on what kind of use is acceptable, and how you should acknowledge this in your work.
You should not use AI if your tutor or school has made clear that this is not allowed. This would be a form of academic misconduct.
You are responsible for any assignment that you submit, and you must make sure that all words and ideas, references, computer code, artworks and any other material generated by AI that you use are acknowledged appropriately according to the guidance from your school or module leader.
The default position is that the use of GAI for all assessed work is not permitted, unless otherwise indicated in the assessment brief and/or Minerva module area. If there is no explicit statement, students should presume they are not permitted to use GAI.
- Assessment use of AI is controlled at the assessment level rather than by a single blanket rule
- The Assessment Policy also requires that students be told clearly what use of AI is and is not permitted for each assessment
- The university states that whether AI can be used depends on the assessment design and the instructions from the school or module leader; using AI where it has been disallowed is academic misconduct
Whether and how AI can be used depends on the type and purpose of the assessment and how the school/module leader has designed the assessment.
If AI use is allowed, your tutor or school will provide guidance on what kind of use is acceptable, and how you should acknowledge this in your work.
You should not use AI if your tutor or school has made clear that this is not allowed. This would be a form of academic misconduct.
The assessment brief must include:
• whether and how students may use generative artificial intelligence (GAI) in the assessment
• clear information about how students should acknowledge use of GAI if applicable.
- This guidance is framed as support for learning rather than submission of assessed work
- Students are also warned to use critical judgment because outputs can be inaccurate or biased, and they should avoid overreliance
- The university permits and actively supports using AI as a study aid for non-graded learning tasks such as explaining concepts, generating quizzes, planning study, and getting feedback
You may want to use tools such as Microsoft Copilot to support your learning in various ways. For example, you can use AI to:
• explain difficult concepts, or suggest different approaches
• answer questions or to ask you questions to check your understanding
• provide quizzes, revision notes, and examples
• give feedback on your work or suggest improvements
• help with planning your study or time management
• suggest study resources
• practise a conversation or language skill.
You should be aware that AI outputs can be inaccurate, unreliable, biased, and can sound very convincing and authoritative. You should not accept outputs as true or complete, but check and evaluate any information critically.
It is important to remember that AI should support your learning, not replace your own thinking and analysis.
- Programming-related AI use is addressed through the same assessment-specific rules as other coursework
- The university does not set a single institution-wide rule specifically for coding assignments in the provided sources
- The taught-student guidance states that students are responsible for any computer code generated by AI that they use and must acknowledge it appropriately where permitted
Whether and how AI can be used depends on the type and purpose of the assessment and how the school/module leader has designed the assessment.
You are responsible for any assignment that you submit, and you must make sure that all words and ideas, references, computer code, artworks and any other material generated by AI that you use are acknowledged appropriately according to the guidance from your school or module leader.
Research
- The university also states that AI tools cannot qualify for authorship
- For postgraduate researchers, AI may be used in the research process, including writing support, but researchers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of their work
- They must check funder, publisher, discipline, and supervisory requirements before using AI in thesis or manuscript preparation, and they may need to disclose or acknowledge that use depending on venue rules
PGRs can use Generative AI in some situations to support the process of doing research, but they are responsible for making informed and ethical choices.
You are responsible and accountable for your own work, so you should carefully review and check any AI-generated outputs that you use to make sure they are accurate and valid.
It is important to find out if there are any restrictions or limitations in your discipline, school, doctoral college, or faculty, and to consider any requirements from your supervisor. This means you should:
• discuss your proposed use of AI with your supervisor and agree your approach
• look for any guidance in your discipline, school, doctoral college, or faculty, and from any publisher or research funder
• follow any requirements for acknowledgement or documentation if you use AI in your work
Generative AI cannot be an author, because legal responsibility lies with a person.
- Supervisory discussion and local or funder rules may also apply
- The university allows AI to support research data and analysis only with careful judgment and appropriate approvals
- Researchers must consider confidentiality, intellectual property, ethics, and legal requirements before entering data into AI systems, and they should not upload personal, confidential, or commercially sensitive data to public tools without authorization
You should think carefully about what information or data you enter into an AI tool. Many AI tools keep user prompts or use them for further training, so they may not be secure or private.
You should not upload personal data, confidential data, commercially sensitive data, or any intellectual property unless you have checked that this is allowed and safe to do so.
If your research involves human participants, sensitive topics, or personal data, you should also consider whether the use of AI affects your ethical approval or data management plans.
This means you should:
• discuss your proposed use of AI with your supervisor and agree your approach
• look for any guidance in your discipline, school, doctoral college, or faculty, and from any publisher or research funder
- The university requires researchers to use AI in ways that uphold research integrity and ethics obligations
- The Annual Statement on Research Integrity also identifies AI as an integrity issue requiring policy development and training
- Researchers must consider whether AI use changes ethical approval or data management needs, and the institutional research ethics framework requires review when methods or procedures change
If your research involves human participants, sensitive topics, or personal data, you should also consider whether the use of AI affects your ethical approval or data management plans.
Any changes to the protocol or method of data collection from that approved by the relevant ethics committee should be submitted for review.
In line with the UK Concordat to Support Research Integrity, the University of Leeds continues to review and strengthen its research integrity arrangements in response to emerging issues, including the use of artificial intelligence in research and scholarly communication.
Work during 2024/25 included the development of guidance and training on the responsible use of generative AI for researchers and postgraduate researchers.
Academic Integrity
- The library also provides a citation format for generative AI tools
- Disclosure of AI use is required when AI is permitted in assessed work or research outputs and where local guidance calls for it
- Taught students must acknowledge AI-generated words, ideas, references, code, artworks, or other material according to school or module instructions, and assessment briefs must tell students how to acknowledge AI use
If AI use is allowed, your tutor or school will provide guidance on what kind of use is acceptable, and how you should acknowledge this in your work.
You are responsible for any assignment that you submit, and you must make sure that all words and ideas, references, computer code, artworks and any other material generated by AI that you use are acknowledged appropriately according to the guidance from your school or module leader.
The assessment brief must include:
• whether and how students may use generative artificial intelligence (GAI) in the assessment
• clear information about how students should acknowledge use of GAI if applicable.
follow any requirements for acknowledgement or documentation if you use AI in your work
- The provided sources do not establish a university endorsement of standalone AI-detection tools as determinative proof
- The academic misconduct procedure explicitly covers unauthorized use of AI tools and allows concerns to be investigated under formal process
- Undisclosed or prohibited AI use can be treated as academic misconduct, and the university warns students that AI misuse may lead to misconduct procedures and penalties
You should not use AI if your tutor or school has made clear that this is not allowed. This would be a form of academic misconduct.
Using generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools in a way that is not permitted in the assessment brief, module handbook or other clear guidance from the University may constitute academic misconduct.
Academic misconduct includes, but is not limited to:
...
using artificial intelligence tools, translation tools, paraphrasing tools, essay mills or third parties in a way that is not permitted in the assessment brief or other clear guidance from the University.
The University may use a range of methods to investigate concerns about academic misconduct.
Institutional & Administrative
- Staff are also expected to be transparent where AI use materially affects work products or communications
- Staff may use AI in their work, but they must do so carefully and remain accountable for outputs and decisions
- The staff guidance requires human oversight, warns against entering confidential or personal data into public tools unless approved, and states that AI should not be used as the sole basis for important judgments such as assessment, recruitment, or formal decision-making
Staff may use AI tools to support their work, but must do so responsibly and in line with University policies.
You remain responsible for the accuracy, appropriateness and legality of any output you use.
Do not input confidential, personal, commercially sensitive or legally privileged information into public AI tools unless you have explicit approval and appropriate safeguards are in place.
AI outputs must be reviewed by a human and should not be relied upon without checking.
AI should not be used as the sole basis for decisions that have significant consequences for individuals, such as assessment, recruitment or formal casework.
Be transparent where AI has been used in a way that materially affects the content or purpose of a document, communication or decision.
- The university also points students and staff toward institutionally supported tools such as Microsoft Copilot
- The university restricts what information can be entered into AI tools and emphasizes data protection, confidentiality, and security
- Public AI tools should not receive personal, confidential, commercially sensitive, legally privileged, or protected research data unless approval and safeguards are in place
Do not input confidential, personal, commercially sensitive or legally privileged information into public AI tools unless you have explicit approval and appropriate safeguards are in place.
You should think carefully about what information or data you enter into an AI tool. Many AI tools keep user prompts or use them for further training, so they may not be secure or private.
You should not upload personal data, confidential data, commercially sensitive data, or any intellectual property unless you have checked that this is allowed and safe to do so.
You may want to use tools such as Microsoft Copilot to support your learning in various ways.
- The Annual Statement on Research Integrity also shows ongoing governance activity in response to AI-related issues
- The university has an institution-level AI position statement and central guidance hub that frame AI use around responsible, ethical, and critical adoption rather than blanket endorsement
- Its position emphasizes that AI should support, not replace, human judgment and that the university is developing guidance and practice across teaching, research, and professional services
Our position is that artificial intelligence (AI) technologies offer significant opportunities to enhance education, research and our ways of working, but they must be used responsibly, ethically and critically.
AI should support, not replace, human judgement, creativity and accountability.
This website brings together information, guidance and resources to help staff and students use generative AI effectively and responsibly in learning, teaching, research and professional services.
In line with the UK Concordat to Support Research Integrity, the University of Leeds continues to review and strengthen its research integrity arrangements in response to emerging issues, including the use of artificial intelligence in research and scholarly communication.
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 Leeds's AI Policies
University of Leeds has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
Disclosure of AI use is required when AI is permitted in assessed work or research outputs and where local guidance calls for it. Taught students must acknowledge AI-generated words, ideas, references, code, artworks, or other material according to school or module instructions, and assessment briefs must tell students how to acknowledge AI use. The library also provides a citation format for generative AI tools.
Undisclosed or prohibited AI use can be treated as academic misconduct, and the university warns students that AI misuse may lead to misconduct procedures and penalties. The academic misconduct procedure explicitly covers unauthorized use of AI tools and allows concerns to be investigated under formal process. The provided sources do not establish a university endorsement of standalone AI-detection tools as determinative proof.
The university restricts what information can be entered into AI tools and emphasizes data protection, confidentiality, and security. Public AI tools should not receive personal, confidential, commercially sensitive, legally privileged, or protected research data unless approval and safeguards are in place. The university also points students and staff toward institutionally supported tools such as Microsoft Copilot.