Teaching & Learning
- In the English Department, using AI in coursework without acknowledgement counts as academic misconduct
- Where AI use is allowed, the permitted use must be communicated clearly in advance, and documentation/disclosure requirements apply
- University-wide, coursework rules are not set as a single blanket permission or ban; subject areas or instructors decide whether AI may be used in assessment-related work
Decisions on the specific possible uses of AI in assessment contexts must be made on a subject-specific basis, whereby the autonomy of the student's performance and the learning and qualification objectives remain decisive.
The permitted use of generative AI must be clearly communicated to students prior to the examinations. This includes the specification and joint discussion of guidelines for documenting the use of AI as well as a corresponding declaration of academic integrity in order to ensure the transparent and fair assessment of student performance.
Hinweis: Vor der Herausgabe an Studierende ist die Mustereigenständigkeitserklärung anzupassen! Die Fakultät, der Fachbereich oder die Lehrperson wählt entweder Option 1 (Nutzung von generativer KI nicht zugelassen) oder Option 2 (Kennzeichnungspflicht im Falle einer erlaubten Nutzung von generativer KI).
It is important to note that using any form of AI or other computational aids in your university coursework, study, exams, or research without acknowledging that input counts as academic misconduct.
- Departments may choose either no AI use or permitted AI use with labeling requirements
- The university states that existing examination regulations already allow AI to be used as a tool, but actual permitted uses in assessments are decided on a subject-specific basis
- If AI is allowed, this must be communicated to students before the examination, and expectations for documenting AI use and a declaration of academic integrity should be specified
The existing framework examination regulations (KRPO/BRPO/MRPO) do not current-ly need to be amended as they already allow for the use of AI as a tool.
The handout outlines various forms of assessment and the challenges that the use of AI entails. Decisions on the specific possible uses of AI in assessment contexts must be made on a subject-specific basis, whereby the autonomy of the student's performance and the learning and qualification objectives remain decisive.
The permitted use of generative AI must be clearly communicated to students prior to the examinations. This includes the specification and joint discussion of guidelines for documenting the use of AI as well as a corresponding declaration of academic integrity in order to ensure the transparent and fair assessment of student performance.
Hinweis: Vor der Herausgabe an Studierende ist die Mustereigenständigkeitserklärung anzupassen! Die Fakultät, der Fachbereich oder die Lehrperson wählt entweder Option 1 (Nutzung von generativer KI nicht zugelassen) oder Option 2 (Kennzeichnungspflicht im Falle einer erlaubten Nutzung von generativer KI).
Diese sollen vor Herausgabe von der jeweiligen Lehrperson durch die eignen entsprechenden Vorgaben ersetzt oder gelöscht werden. Für ein besseres Verständnis stehen zwei Beispielerklärungen als angepasste Worddokumente zur Verfügung. Beispielerklärung 1 verbietet den Einsatz von KI, während Beispielerklärung 2 den Einsatz von KI als Hilfsmittel zulässt.
- A business department memo says AI can support learning while exams remain AI-resilient
- In the English Department, AI use in study activities must still be acknowledged to avoid academic misconduct
- The university encourages teaching staff to explore AI with students and presents AI as something students should learn to use confidently
University teaching must adapt to technological developments in terms of content and didactics in order to promote future-oriented skills (future skills, AI literacy) and, above all, to prepare students in the confident use of AI. The teaching staff at the UT is encouraged to test the potential of AI in collaboration with the students.
Generative KI ist mittlerweile ein alltägliches Werkzeug. Unser Fachbereich Wirtschaftswissenschaft hat ein kurzes Memo veröffentlicht, das Ihnen helfen soll, KI effektiv und verantwortungsbewusst einzusetzen. Das Memo orientiert sich an den Leitlinien der Universität Tübingen und zeigt, wie KI Ihr Lernen fördern kann – während Prüfungen KI-resilient bleiben.
It is important to note that using any form of AI or other computational aids in your university coursework, study, exams, or research without acknowledging that input counts as academic misconduct.
Research
- At the university level, members are instructed to use generative AI responsibly and in line with good scientific practice
- Authors remain individually responsible for ensuring their texts are free of plagiarism and that sources are critically checked
- In the English Department, research and writing are expected to result from the researchers’ and writers’ own thought processes, and unacknowledged AI use in research counts as academic misconduct
Thirdly, all members of the University are exhorted to use GenAI responsibly in line with good scientific practice. Among other things this means that when working with GenAI it is the individual responsibility of the authors to ensure that their texts do not contain any plagiarism and all sources are critically examined.
As a community of students, lecturers, researchers, and future teachers, the English Department is committed to all research and writing being the result of the researchers’ and writers’ own thought processes, analyses and critical thinking.
It is important to note that using any form of AI or other computational aids in your university coursework, study, exams, or research without acknowledging that input counts as academic misconduct.
- The university does not set specific rules for AI in research data or analysis in the provided texts
- It does, however, state that users are responsible for how data provided by AI systems are processed, and it flags unresolved data protection issues as a concern
It also means that each user must assume responsibility for how and to what end the data provided by AI systems are processed.
Besides its wide potential, GenAI also has many problematic implications. These include the fact that there are still many unresolved copyright and data protection issues.
- The English Department also treats unacknowledged AI use in research as academic misconduct
- The university links AI use to good scientific practice and places responsibility on users and authors to avoid plagiarism, critically examine sources, and take responsibility for data processing
Thirdly, all members of the University are exhorted to use GenAI responsibly in line with good scientific practice. Among other things this means that when working with GenAI it is the individual responsibility of the authors to ensure that their texts do not contain any plagiarism and all sources are critically examined. It also means that each user must assume responsibility for how and to what end the data provided by AI systems are processed.
A critical and constructive approach to AI takes into account academic integrity / good scientific practice, copyright and authorship, data protection, equal opportunities and deskilling.
It is important to note that using any form of AI or other computational aids in your university coursework, study, exams, or research without acknowledging that input counts as academic misconduct.
Academic Integrity
- The download materials show two model approaches: either AI is not allowed, or permitted AI use requires labeling
- Disclosure of AI use is required where AI has been used in coursework, study, exams, or research, at least in the English Department policy
- University assessment guidance also says that when AI is permitted, students must be told the documentation rules in advance and a declaration of academic integrity should accompany this
It is important to note that using any form of AI or other computational aids in your university coursework, study, exams, or research without acknowledging that input counts as academic misconduct.
The permitted use of generative AI must be clearly communicated to students prior to the examinations. This includes the specification and joint discussion of guidelines for documenting the use of AI as well as a corresponding declaration of academic integrity in order to ensure the transparent and fair assessment of student performance.
Hinweis: Vor der Herausgabe an Studierende ist die Mustereigenständigkeitserklärung anzupassen! Die Fakultät, der Fachbereich oder die Lehrperson wählt entweder Option 1 (Nutzung von generativer KI nicht zugelassen) oder Option 2 (Kennzeichnungspflicht im Falle einer erlaubten Nutzung von generativer KI).
- The provided sources do not describe AI detection tools or detection procedures
- They do state that using AI or other computational aids without acknowledgement counts as academic misconduct
It is important to note that using any form of AI or other computational aids in your university coursework, study, exams, or research without acknowledging that input counts as academic misconduct.
Institutional & Administrative
- Staff and university members are also urged to use AI responsibly
- The handout is aimed at teachers, examiners, and module coordinators as a basis for subject-specific decisions about implementation
- Faculty are encouraged to test AI collaboratively with students and may use AI for teaching materials, communication, and feedback processes
The handout is not a legal opinion. It outlines framework conditions and options for the use of generative AI in teaching and assessment contexts, and serves as a basis for information and / or decision-making on the possibilities of implementation, opportunities and risks of AI for all teachers, examiners and module coordinators at UT in the respective subject context.
The teaching staff at the UT is encouraged to test the potential of AI in collaboration with the students.
On the one hand, AI can enable the rapid creation and adaptation of teaching materials, promote diversity-oriented teaching and learning methods, and support automated communication and feedback processes.
Thirdly, all members of the University are exhorted to use GenAI responsibly in line with good scientific practice.
- The university warns that generative AI raises unresolved data protection issues and says users are responsible for how AI-provided data are processed
- The provided sources do not set a data-classification scheme or list institutionally approved and prohibited AI platforms, though they reference bwGPT/Ask Alma as a related university resource
Besides its wide potential, GenAI also has many problematic implications. These include the fact that there are still many unresolved copyright and data protection issues.
It also means that each user must assume responsibility for how and to what end the data provided by AI systems are processed.
A critical and constructive approach to AI takes into account academic integrity / good scientific practice, copyright and authorship, data protection, equal opportunities and deskilling.
* bwGPT/Ask Alma
- The university has an overarching institutional position on generative AI and has created a Generative AI working group
- The handout was developed by this interdisciplinary group, agreed with the faculties, and approved by the President’s Office
- This group was established by the President’s Office, includes representatives from every faculty and relevant units, and advises the Rectorate on AI use across study, research, teaching, and other university areas
This text outlines the university's position regarding generative AI tools.
To this end, the President’s Office has set up the Generative AI work group , consisting of members from every faculty, central administration and relevant institutions.
Zu diesem Zweck wurde die „AG Generative KI“ ins Leben gerufen, um den verantwortungsvollen Einsatz von Generativer Künstlicher Intelligenz zu fördern. Die AG berät das Rektorat der Universität Tübingen zum Einsatz generativer KI in Studium, Forschung und Lehre, sowie allen weiteren Bereichen der Universität.
The handout “Artificial Intelligence in Teaching and Assessment Contexts” was developed by the interdisciplinary working group “Generative AI in Teaching and Research” on behalf of the University of Tübingen (UT) Deans and the President's Office”. It was agreed with the faculties and approved by the President's Office on April 30, 2024.
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 Tubingen's AI Policies
University of Tubingen has defined AI policies in 11 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 92%.
Disclosure of AI use is required where AI has been used in coursework, study, exams, or research, at least in the English Department policy. University assessment guidance also says that when AI is permitted, students must be told the documentation rules in advance and a declaration of academic integrity should accompany this. The download materials show two model approaches: either AI is not allowed, or permitted AI use requires labeling.
The provided sources do not describe AI detection tools or detection procedures. They do state that using AI or other computational aids without acknowledgement counts as academic misconduct.
The university warns that generative AI raises unresolved data protection issues and says users are responsible for how AI-provided data are processed. The provided sources do not set a data-classification scheme or list institutionally approved and prohibited AI platforms, though they reference bwGPT/Ask Alma as a related university resource.