Teaching & Learning
- Students are also told to follow unit-level guidance and consult tutors if unsure
- Use of AI in coursework and assignments is set at assessment level through a traffic-light model rather than a single university-wide rule
- Some assignments prohibit AI, some allow only specified assistive uses with recording requirements, and some explicitly build AI use into the task and learning outcomes
Use this system to create a shared understanding between you and your students to clarify what is acceptable use of AI in an assessment.
In these assessments, you must tell your students that the use of AI is not permitted.
In these assignments you will specify how AI tools can be used in an assistive role for the assessment.
You must explicitly communicate to your students how the AI tools can be used in the assignment. For example, you might allow the AI tool to be used in the formation of ideas or concepts in the creative process, but the student must record how the AI generated output was incorporated into the final submission. (Refer to the UAL Student Guidance).
In these assignments the use of AI will explicitly form part of the assignment task and learning outcomes.
Adhere to unit and institutional guidelines: consult your tutors if you are unsure.
- AI use in examinations and formal assessments depends on the assessment design
- For other assessments, staff must specify permitted AI use or explicitly include AI in the learning outcomes
- UAL states that AI is not permitted in some assessments, including in-person unseen examinations, vivas, crits, discussion-based assessments, and where spoken or written English language skills are being assessed
In these assessments, you must tell your students that the use of AI is not permitted.
Examples of assessments where AI tools are not allowed could include:
* a Crit
* written reflective journal which is aimed to demonstrate a student’s thought process and their ability to critically think, analyse and evaluate
* vivas
* some studio and practical work
* discussion-based assessments
* where spoken and written English language skills need to be assessed
* in-person unseen examinations
* encouraging analogue design (e.g. textiles) in an attempt to be more sustainable or environmentally conscious
In these assignments you will specify how AI tools can be used in an assistive role for the assessment.
In these assignments the use of AI will explicitly form part of the assignment task and learning outcomes.
- UAL permits students to use generative AI and translation tools as learning support when used responsibly and thoughtfully
- The guidance encourages using AI to support understanding, exploration, and skill development rather than replacing students' own learning, and tells students to follow course rules and consult tutors where needed
This guidance supports you to use Gen AI responsibly and thoughtfully, ensuring it enhances rather than diminishes your learning and creative practice.
Responsible use of Gen AI means recognising when it enhances your learning and when your own exploration, experimentation and reflection are more valuable and can happen without use of Gen AI.
* Use translation tools to preview key vocabulary or concepts from readings, briefs, or lectures.
* Translate readings, briefs and feedback to improve comprehension.
* Use AI tools to summarise or rephrase lecture content in simpler English.
* Use bilingual dictionaries or translation tools to clarify unfamiliar terms.
* Explore multiple translations to compare meaning and nuance.
* Treat translation tools as learning aids, not shortcuts.
Adhere to unit and institutional guidelines: consult your tutors if you are unsure.
- Programming-related AI use therefore appears to be assessment-specific and instructor-directed rather than uniformly allowed or banned
- UAL does not provide a separate university-wide coding policy, but it explicitly recognizes testing and debugging code as an example of an assessment process for which AI may be permitted when staff specify acceptable use
In these assignments you will specify how AI tools can be used in an assistive role for the assessment.
Examples include:
* drafting and structuring content
* as a support tutor .g. facilitating peer-like dialogue and debate to real world problems.
* supporting a particular process such as testing and debugging code or translating content
* providing ideas or inspiration to help you get started on an assessment brief.
Research
- The university states that oversight sits with a research ethics sub-committee, but no explicit AI research ethics requirements were identified in the supplied texts
- The provided research integrity sources establish institutional oversight for research ethics and integrity, but they do not define AI-specific rules for grant proposals, ethics applications, or research integrity submissions
Oversight of research ethics and integrity for research and knowledge exchange (RKE)
activities at UAL is the responsibility of the Research and KE Ethics Sub-Committee
Academic Integrity
- UAL requires transparency about AI use where AI is used in assessed work or translation-supported academic activity
- Students may be required to record how AI output was incorporated, keep track of tools used, reference AI or machine translation tools, keep records of prompts and original work, and follow disclosure guidance from tutors and courses
You must explicitly communicate to your students how the AI tools can be used in the assignment. For example, you might allow the AI tool to be used in the formation of ideas or concepts in the creative process, but the student must record how the AI generated output was incorporated into the final submission. (Refer to the UAL Student Guidance).
* Track your use of Gen AI: be mindful of which tools you have used, how they contributed and when your own thinking drove the work.
UAL courses have their own rules about acceptable use of AI and translation tools. Your tutor will want you to reference the use of MT tools and keep records of your prompts and original work to show their use.
* If you use AI or translation tools in class or in assessments, seek permission first. Follow UAL’s guidance on disclosure and referencing and recording in classes.
* Be transparent—especially in written work, research, or collaborative projects.
Any AI tools used in the creation of assessment evidence must be clearly referenced,
Learners must maintain a record of the prompts used to generate AI outputs and include this as part of the assessment process, ensuring transparency and accountability (See Appendix 1 for a proforma that can be used).
- In the awarding body guidance, misuse of AI is defined as submitting AI-generated work as one's own when the guidelines have not been followed
- UAL states that it does not use AI detection software because it does not consider such tools reliable evidence and because of data security, copyright, and training-data risks
- Undisclosed or improper AI use can still be treated through academic misconduct processes, with cheating potentially leading to failure of the assignment or unit, suspension, or expulsion
We do not use AI detection software because:
* These tools currently lack the accuracy required for the UAL to consider them reliable evidence and will lead to ‘false positives’ where students are falsely accused of using AI.
* Uploading the material to these platforms could lead to a breach of data security and copyright.
* The content submitted can be used as training data for other AI systems.
The University of the Arts London takes all cases of cheating seriously.
The offence is likely to lead to failure of that assignment and/or unit. Serious or repeated offences may lead to failure of the whole stage of the course, suspension, or even expulsion.
Misuse of AI is where learners have failed to adhere to the guidelines above and knowingly submit AI-generated work as their own. This is because the work submitted does not demonstrate the learner’s own knowledge, understanding or abilities in relation to the
Institutional & Administrative
- UAL says academic colleagues may use generative AI in teaching under its AI position statement, but it excludes some uses such as marking students' work
- In the awarding body guidance, if AI is used to generate assessment feedback, staff should explain that use, retain process records, ensure assessor review and oversight, and comply with GDPR
Yes, we may use Generative AI based on our AI Position Statement guidelines for AI’s integration in education. The position statement communicates our approach and principles regarding AI use and the need to embrace AI through a curious, critical, and compassionate lens.
There are some exceptions where we do not use Generative AI such as marking students work.
If AI tools are used in generating feedback for assessments, centres should:
clearly explain how AI tools were used, both to learners and in any accompanying documentation. For example, include a transparency statement such as: Feedback provided to learners has been generated with the assistance of AI tools and reviewed by the assessor to ensure alignment with learning outcomes and individual performance.
retain original notes, drafts or prompts used in conjunction with AI tools as evidence of the process and to demonstrate the assessor’s oversight and decision-making
ensure that all AI usage complies with GDPR regulations.
- The awarding body guidance also requires GDPR compliance when AI is used
- UAL tells students to protect ideas and data by using UAL-approved tools and to avoid uploading sensitive or personal information
- For non-UAL platforms used in learning and teaching, equivalent UAL alternatives must be provided for summative-assessment preparation, students must have a UAL option if personal data is collected, and course teams should consult Digital Learning before use
Be thoughtful about where and how you use Gen AI. Protect your ideas and data by using UAL-approved tools and avoid uploading sensitive or personal information.
Using Gen AI responsibly also means safeguarding your own work, respecting intellectual property (IP) rights and handling personal data in line with UK legal regulations.
* When non-UAL DL platforms are used to support learning and teaching and preparing for summative assessment, equivalent UAL DL alternatives must be provided.
* If the platform collects personal data (data that identifies someone such as their name or email address) students must be provided with the option of using a UAL digital learning platform.
Course teams should discuss any potential use of non-UAL platforms with their Digital Learning team before using them.
ensure that all AI usage complies with GDPR regulations.
- The university also describes this position statement as communicating its approach and principles for integrating AI in education
- UAL has an institutional AI position statement that frames AI use in education and says AI should be approached through a curious, critical, and compassionate lens
- Beyond that, the supplied research governance materials show committee oversight for research ethics and integrity, but they do not set out a broader AI governance roadmap in the provided text
Our Position Statement on AI
Yes, we may use Generative AI based on our AI Position Statement guidelines for AI’s integration in education. The position statement communicates our approach and principles regarding AI use and the need to embrace AI through a curious, critical, and compassionate lens.
Oversight of research ethics and integrity for research and knowledge exchange (RKE)
activities at UAL is the responsibility of the Research and KE Ethics Sub-Committee
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 the Arts London's AI Policies
University of the Arts London has defined AI policies in 10 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 83%.
UAL requires transparency about AI use where AI is used in assessed work or translation-supported academic activity. Students may be required to record how AI output was incorporated, keep track of tools used, reference AI or machine translation tools, keep records of prompts and original work, and follow disclosure guidance from tutors and courses.
UAL states that it does not use AI detection software because it does not consider such tools reliable evidence and because of data security, copyright, and training-data risks. Undisclosed or improper AI use can still be treated through academic misconduct processes, with cheating potentially leading to failure of the assignment or unit, suspension, or expulsion. In the awarding body guidance, misuse of AI is defined as submitting AI-generated work as one's own when the guidelines have not been followed.
UAL tells students to protect ideas and data by using UAL-approved tools and to avoid uploading sensitive or personal information. For non-UAL platforms used in learning and teaching, equivalent UAL alternatives must be provided for summative-assessment preparation, students must have a UAL option if personal data is collected, and course teams should consult Digital Learning before use. The awarding body guidance also requires GDPR compliance when AI is used.