Teaching & Learning
- Where AI use is allowed, students remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, and proper acknowledgement of the submitted work
- Use of AI in coursework is not uniformly permitted or banned across the university; it depends on the assessment and the module tutor’s instructions
- Students may only use AI when the assessment brief or tutor explicitly allows it, and undisclosed or unauthorized use can be treated as academic misconduct
Students must ensure that all submitted work is their own and that any use of AI tools is explicitly permitted within the assessment guidelines.
Some tutors may permit the use of AI tools in certain assignments, while others may prohibit them entirely. Students should always check the module handbook, assessment brief, or ask their tutor if unsure.
If a student submits work generated by AI as if it were their own original work, this may constitute academic misconduct.
Output generated by GenAI should be treated like any other source and appropriately acknowledged.
Students are responsible for the final output and for checking the accuracy of AI-generated content before submission.
- Assessment use of AI is governed at assessment level rather than by a single blanket rule
- Staff guidance also frames AI decisions in assessment design and feedback as something that must be made explicit to students
- The university states that each assessment should specify what level of AI use is allowed, and students must follow those instructions; using AI contrary to the assessment rules may amount to academic misconduct
Assessment briefs should clearly indicate whether and how AI tools may be used.
Students must ensure that all submitted work is their own and that any use of AI tools is explicitly permitted within the assessment guidelines.
If a student submits work generated by AI as if it were their own original work, this may constitute academic misconduct.
The level of AI use in an assessment should be made explicit to students.
- This is framed as support for learning rather than a substitute for independent academic effort
- Students are warned to verify outputs, avoid overreliance, and not present AI-generated material as their own assessed work
- The university allows and encourages students to use generative AI as a study aid for learning support activities such as idea generation, explanation, planning, and feedback, provided they use it critically
AI tools can be useful for brainstorming ideas, summarising information, generating practice questions, improving grammar and structure, and supporting revision.
Use AI as a study support tool, not as a replacement for your own thinking.
Always critically evaluate AI-generated responses for accuracy, bias, and relevance.
Students are responsible for the final output and for checking the accuracy of AI-generated content before submission.
Research
- The material provided is therefore general integrity guidance rather than a specific university-wide manuscript policy
- AI-generated content cannot be treated as an author, and any use that affects scholarly writing would need to align with research integrity expectations and publisher requirements
- The university does not set out a detailed standalone rule for AI drafting of manuscripts in the provided sources, but it does state that researchers remain responsible for the integrity of their outputs and must act honestly and transparently
Researchers are ultimately responsible for the accuracy and integrity of all aspects of their research.
The University expects all researchers to observe the highest standards of rigour and integrity in all aspects of research.
Authors, peer reviewers and editors should take care when submitting papers by checking the content and making sure it is factually correct and where AI has been used, this should be acknowledged. AI and AI-assisted technologies should not be listed as an author or co-author, or cited as an author.
- As a result, AI use in research data and analysis is addressed only through broader research integrity and acceptable-use requirements
- The university requires researchers to protect confidentiality, manage data responsibly, and comply with legal, ethical, and governance requirements, including when using digital tools
- The provided sources do not give a detailed AI-specific rule for data analysis or synthetic data generation, but they do impose general duties that would govern such use, especially around data security, accuracy, and responsible conduct
Researchers must comply with all legal, ethical and professional obligations in carrying out research.
Researchers should ensure that research data are accurately recorded, securely stored, and managed in accordance with legal, ethical, funding body and University requirements.
You must not upload, input or otherwise process personal, confidential, sensitive or commercially valuable information in unauthorised third-party AI tools.
- This is a defined integrity framework, though not a detailed rulebook for every research document type such as grant proposals or ethics forms
- The university requires research involving AI to follow established standards of research integrity, ethics, honesty, accountability, and legal compliance
- Researchers remain personally responsible for the integrity of their work, and the university’s annual research integrity statement notes that AI use in scholarly processes should be checked carefully and acknowledged where used
The University expects all researchers to observe the highest standards of rigour and integrity in all aspects of research.
Researchers must comply with all legal, ethical and professional obligations in carrying out research.
Researchers are ultimately responsible for the accuracy and integrity of all aspects of their research.
Authors, peer reviewers and editors should take care when submitting papers by checking the content and making sure it is factually correct and where AI has been used, this should be acknowledged.
Academic Integrity
- The university requires transparency when AI is used in academic work
- For research-related writing, the annual integrity statement also says AI use should be acknowledged
- Students must acknowledge AI-generated output as a source, and staff guidance indicates that assessment instructions should state when and how AI may be used
Output generated by GenAI should be treated like any other source and appropriately acknowledged.
Assessment briefs should clearly indicate whether and how AI tools may be used.
Authors, peer reviewers and editors should take care when submitting papers by checking the content and making sure it is factually correct and where AI has been used, this should be acknowledged.
- The university treats unauthorized AI-generated submission as a potential academic misconduct matter
- No explicit institutional endorsement or procedural rule for AI detectors is defined in the provided sources
- The provided sources emphasize student responsibility and misconduct consequences, but they do not establish a detailed university-wide AI detection regime in the material reviewed
If a student submits work generated by AI as if it were their own original work, this may constitute academic misconduct.
Students must ensure that all submitted work is their own and that any use of AI tools is explicitly permitted within the assessment guidelines.
Institutional & Administrative
- The guidance is therefore permissive with responsibility and transparency requirements
- Assessment design should make the level of AI use explicit, and staff should use AI in ways that support rather than replace academic judgment
- The university provides explicit staff-facing guidance that AI may be used in teaching, assessment, and feedback, but staff must apply professional judgment, maintain human oversight, and communicate permitted student use clearly
The level of AI use in an assessment should be made explicit to students.
AI can support assessment and feedback practices, but it should not replace academic judgement.
Staff remain responsible for the quality, accuracy and appropriateness of any feedback or assessment decision where AI has been used.
AI tools can be used to support curriculum design, content generation and administrative efficiency, but human oversight is essential.
- The provided sources do not set out a full approved-platform list, but they do establish a prohibition on unauthorized tools for sensitive information
- The university prohibits users from entering personal, confidential, sensitive, or commercially valuable information into unauthorized third-party AI tools
- Its acceptable use rules therefore impose clear data protection constraints on AI use, especially for staff and researchers handling institutional or personal data
You must not upload, input or otherwise process personal, confidential, sensitive or commercially valuable information in unauthorised third-party AI tools.
Users are responsible for ensuring that their use of AI tools complies with data protection, confidentiality and information security requirements.
- No dedicated AI committee or formal roadmap is explicitly defined in the provided materials
- The sources show governance through guidance, integrity frameworks, and acceptable-use controls rather than a single comprehensive AI strategy document
- The university has an institutional AI guidance approach that emphasizes responsible, ethical, and transparent use of AI across teaching, learning, and research-related activity
The University of Northampton recognises that Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools are becoming increasingly embedded in education and professional practice.
Our approach is to support the responsible, ethical and transparent use of AI.
The University expects all researchers to observe the highest standards of rigour and integrity in all aspects of research.
Users are responsible for ensuring that their use of AI tools complies with data protection, confidentiality and information security requirements.
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 Northampton's AI Policies
University of Northampton has defined AI policies in 11 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 92%.
The university requires transparency when AI is used in academic work. Students must acknowledge AI-generated output as a source, and staff guidance indicates that assessment instructions should state when and how AI may be used. For research-related writing, the annual integrity statement also says AI use should be acknowledged.
The university treats unauthorized AI-generated submission as a potential academic misconduct matter. The provided sources emphasize student responsibility and misconduct consequences, but they do not establish a detailed university-wide AI detection regime in the material reviewed. No explicit institutional endorsement or procedural rule for AI detectors is defined in the provided sources.
The university prohibits users from entering personal, confidential, sensitive, or commercially valuable information into unauthorized third-party AI tools. Its acceptable use rules therefore impose clear data protection constraints on AI use, especially for staff and researchers handling institutional or personal data. The provided sources do not set out a full approved-platform list, but they do establish a prohibition on unauthorized tools for sensitive information.