Teaching & Learning
- Use of generative AI in coursework is at module or tutor discretion rather than uniformly permitted
- Where AI use is allowed, students are required to acknowledge it through referencing and to check and document outputs carefully
- Students must follow the assessment brief and tutor guidance, and submitting AI-created work as their own without acknowledgement is prohibited
2.1. Students will be advised when and how it is permissible to use generative AI in assignments and assessments.
Your assessment brief may describe what use of AI is appropriate. However, this will not always be the case. If you are unsure, then please speak to your tutor.
It is important to remember that it is an academic offence to download material from the web and submit it as your own work, or submit work created by using AI tools without appropriate acknowledgement. You should follow our guidelines on referencing generative AI.
If you are guided to use generative AI in your assessments or assignments, you will need to acknowledge its use through referencing.
Note: Generative AI should only be used for creating your assignments if you have been specifically told to do this by your module leader.
- The broader regulations also classify cheating in controlled condition assessments as an assessment offence
- The university states that AI use in assessments is determined by the specific assessment and by tutor or module leader direction
- Students must ask if they are unsure, and AI-generated work cannot be submitted in an assessment without appropriate acknowledgement
2.1. Students will be advised when and how it is permissible to use generative AI in assignments and assessments.
We recognise there will be diverse approaches to AI across our communities and at the level of specific assessments. Teams will be supported to agree an approach at programme level.
Always speak to your module leader if you are considering using AI in any assessment.
If you are guided to use generative AI in your assessments or assignments, you will need to acknowledge its use through referencing.
Assessment offences include, but are not limited to, plagiarism, collusion, contract cheating, submitting work that is not your own, falsification, fabrication, research ethics breaches and cheating in controlled condition assessments.
- The guidance frames study use as allowed with caution rather than unrestricted reliance
- At the same time, students are expected to use human critical thinking and oversight, because AI outputs may be inaccurate, outdated, or fabricated
- The university encourages AI literacy and presents generative AI as a study support tool for explanation, feedback, accessibility, and personalized learning
UWE Bristol is committed to harnessing the transformative potential of generative AI to enhance learning, teaching and assessment. We aim to support students and staff to become AI-literate, equipped to drive progress and innovation through the ethical use of these powerful technologies.
1.5. All students will have opportunities to meaningfully engage with generative AI during their studies.
We will be ambitious and use generative AI to enrich personalised learning and sharpen critical thinking.
Personalisation. It can adapt its tone, structure and keywords to specific audiences. It can explain and give feedback.
Human creativity, critical thinking and oversight are still essential when producing new high-quality text and imagery. To help mitigate the following limitations, you will always need to check and edit content.
Factual accuracy. AI will often generate plausible sounding but incorrect and false information if not carefully monitored.
- For research uses, the university specifically says Copilot or other LLM use must be acknowledged and not treated as original work
- Any AI use in assessed work still follows the same assessment-brief and tutor-discretion model, with acknowledgement required where used
- UWE provides Microsoft Copilot as the university-supported generative AI platform for students and staff, but it does not set a separate university-wide rule for programming assignments in the provided sources
Copilot is the generative AI platform available to all students and staff at UWE.
2.1. Students will be advised when and how it is permissible to use generative AI in assignments and assessments.
Your assessment brief may describe what use of AI is appropriate. However, this will not always be the case. If you are unsure, then please speak to your tutor.
appropriately acknowledge all use of Copilot or any other LLM (see referencing format in Referencing AI use section below).
never present AI-generated material as wholly original research.
Research
- The guidance also says researchers should consider whether they are substituting AI for their own original ideas and critical thinking
- Researchers may use GenAI or LLMs in research writing only with transparent disclosure, proper referencing, and careful human verification
- The university prohibits presenting AI-generated material as wholly original research and requires researchers to cross-check outputs and sources
After reading this guidance, you should be able to:
* document and disclose GenAI and LLM use transparently in grant applications, publications and other written outputs, and project records.
Therefore, researchers should:
* appropriately acknowledge all use of Copilot or any other LLM (see referencing format in Referencing AI use section below).
* never present AI-generated material as wholly original research.
* check outputs and sources carefully to avoid unintentional plagiarism.
How will I document and disclose my AI use in publications, grant applications, or reports?
Am I contributing original ideas and critical thinking, or am I depending on the AI to generate ideas in my place?
Any material wholly or partially produced by LLMs must be appropriately referenced. Presenting LLM-generated responses as your own work constitutes academic misconduct and could result in disciplinary action or funding withdrawal.
- The research ethics handbook also warns that AI and big data technologies can create ethical risks around anonymised datasets and re-identification
- The guidance says GenAI or LLMs should not be used when personal, sensitive, or confidential data are involved, or when outputs cannot be adequately verified
- The university allows researchers to consider AI use in research data and analysis only with strong caution around verification, confidentiality, bias, and re-identification risk
After reading this guidance, you should be able to:
* identify and mitigate risks to accuracy, reliability, data protection, confidentiality, and intellectual property.
How will I check the accuracy of AI outputs?
Can I reproduce consistent results?
Do I have the expertise to validate the AI-generated content?
If in doubt, GenAI or LLMs should not be used for:
* processing personal, sensitive, or confidential data.
* tasks requiring original critical analysis or novel theoretical insights.
* when you cannot adequately verify the accuracy of outputs.
* situations where bias could significantly impact research validity or ethics.
Artificial Intelligence (AI): Research involving novel or ethically sensitive research uses of AI requires ethical review.
Confidentiality is key, and is an increasingly complex area with the advent of artificial intelligence and other big data technologies that may risk individuals being re-identified from supposedly anonymised data sets.
- UWE explicitly requires ethical review for novel or ethically sensitive research uses of AI
- Presenting AI-generated material as original research is prohibited and can constitute academic misconduct
- Its research guidance also requires transparent disclosure of AI use in grant applications, publications, reports, and project records, and says researchers should be prepared to explain that use to reviewers, funders, or ethics committees
Artificial Intelligence (AI): Research involving novel or ethically sensitive research uses of AI requires ethical review.
After reading this guidance, you should be able to:
* document and disclose GenAI and LLM use transparently in grant applications, publications and other written outputs, and project records.
Would I be comfortable explaining my AI use to reviewers, funders, or ethics committees?
Research funders: UKRI, Wellcome Trust, ERC, and other major funders now require explicit declaration of AI assistance in grant applications and reports.
Institutional policies: Universities increasingly mandate AI use disclosure in thesis submissions, ethics applications, and research progress reports.
Presenting LLM-generated responses as your own work constitutes academic misconduct and could result in disciplinary action or funding withdrawal.
Academic Integrity
- UWE requires students and researchers to acknowledge and reference AI use when it is permitted
- For research outputs, any material wholly or partially produced by LLMs must be appropriately referenced, and use must be documented and disclosed transparently
- For student work, AI-generated assessment content without appropriate acknowledgement is an academic offence, and the university provides specific referencing guidance
It is an academic offence to download material from the web and submit it as your own work or submit work created by using AI tools without appropriate acknowledgement.
If you are guided to use generative AI in your assessments or assignments, you will need to acknowledge its use through referencing.
As the content recalled from AI tools cannot be replicated, we recommend that you reference the outputs as a personal communication or an image.
If your module leader has stated you are allowed to use generative AI you need to:
* correctly document your use of the AI tool so that you can give a full reference.
After reading this guidance, you should be able to:
* document and disclose GenAI and LLM use transparently in grant applications, publications and other written outputs, and project records.
Any material wholly or partially produced by LLMs must be appropriately referenced.
- The provided sources do not state a specific university position on AI detection tools such as Turnitin or GPTZero
- For research, presenting LLM-generated responses as one's own can result in disciplinary action or funding withdrawal
- They do state that undisclosed AI-generated assessment work is an academic offence or academic misconduct, and that allegations are handled under the university's academic conduct and misconduct procedures
2.7. Policies, guidelines and detection tools will be regularly reviewed, considering generative AI's impact on teaching, learning and assessment.
It is an academic offence to download material from the web and submit it as your own work or submit work created by using AI tools without appropriate acknowledgement.
The Academic Conduct Policy and Academic Misconduct Procedures set out the
Presenting LLM-generated responses as your own work constitutes academic misconduct and could result in disciplinary action or funding withdrawal.
Institutional & Administrative
- The university also says staff should educate students about generative AI best practice
- The provided sources do not set detailed rules on staff grading, recommendation letters, or administrative communications
- UWE states that staff will be supported to evaluate and integrate AI tools into their work, and that teaching teams may design curricula and assessments that integrate AI skills
We aim to support students and staff to become AI-literate, equipped to drive progress and innovation through the ethical use of these powerful technologies.
2.5. Teaching teams are empowered to develop innovative curricula and assessments that authentically integrate AI skills for their subject.
3.4. We will provide development opportunities for staff to effectively evaluate and integrate AI tools into their work.
Staff should be educating students about Generative AI best practice, so making them aware of the difference between Copilot and other Generative AI tools is important as students are likely to be trying these things for themselves without necessarily being aware of the implications.
- These sources establish both an approved platform and clear privacy-related restrictions
- UWE identifies Microsoft Copilot as its data-protected generative AI platform for students and staff and distinguishes it from third-party tools
- The university prohibits entering personal or sensitive information into AI tools in student guidance, says student work should not be submitted to unapproved platforms without student consent, and warns researchers not to use GenAI or LLMs for personal, sensitive, or confidential data if in doubt
2.6. To uphold ethical principles, protect privacy and respect intellectual property rights, we will not submit student work to platforms unapproved by the University without the student's consent.
Do not enter personal or sensitive information into AI tools. It is often unknown how that data will be stored or could be accessed and used by others.
Copilot is the generative AI platform available to all students and staff at UWE. UWE has access to Microsoft’s premium data-protected version of the Copilot chatbot through its Microsoft education subscription. This version ensures that nothing you enter will be shared beyond UWE or used to train any AI models. This is not the case with other third-party tools (like Chat GPT), where you potentially risk having aspects of your work made available to others.
If in doubt, GenAI or LLMs should not be used for:
* processing personal, sensitive, or confidential data.
- In research governance, UWE states that it is still developing its position on AI in research
- It also states that policies, guidelines, and detection tools will be reviewed regularly, and that programme teams will be supported to agree local approaches
- UWE has an institution-level AI principles framework for learning, teaching, and assessment, tied to Strategy 2030, and states that the principles will continue to evolve
UWE Bristol is committed to harnessing the transformative potential of generative AI to enhance learning, teaching and assessment.
Aligned with our Strategy 2030, these principles provide guidance on utilising generative AI across educational provision at UWE Bristol while upholding our values of being ambitious, innovative, inclusive, collaborative, and enterprising.
These principles will continue to develop, as we continue to support all students to succeed.
2.7. Policies, guidelines and detection tools will be regularly reviewed, considering generative AI's impact on teaching, learning and assessment.
We recognise there will be diverse approaches to AI across our communities and at the level of specific assessments. Teams will be supported to agree an approach at programme level.
Artificial Intelligence (AI): Research involving novel or ethically sensitive research uses of AI requires ethical review. (UWE is developing its position in relation to AI in research, along with the rest of the sector.)
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 West of England (UWE Bristol)'s AI Policies
University of the West of England (UWE Bristol) has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
UWE requires students and researchers to acknowledge and reference AI use when it is permitted. For student work, AI-generated assessment content without appropriate acknowledgement is an academic offence, and the university provides specific referencing guidance. For research outputs, any material wholly or partially produced by LLMs must be appropriately referenced, and use must be documented and disclosed transparently.
The provided sources do not state a specific university position on AI detection tools such as Turnitin or GPTZero. They do state that undisclosed AI-generated assessment work is an academic offence or academic misconduct, and that allegations are handled under the university's academic conduct and misconduct procedures. For research, presenting LLM-generated responses as one's own can result in disciplinary action or funding withdrawal.
UWE identifies Microsoft Copilot as its data-protected generative AI platform for students and staff and distinguishes it from third-party tools. The university prohibits entering personal or sensitive information into AI tools in student guidance, says student work should not be submitted to unapproved platforms without student consent, and warns researchers not to use GenAI or LLMs for personal, sensitive, or confidential data if in doubt. These sources establish both an approved platform and clear privacy-related restrictions.