Teaching & Learning
- For student coursework and assignments, use of generative AI is treated under the academic integrity rules
- Using generative AI in submitted work without proper acknowledgment or an approved declaration method is defined as plagiarism, and fabricated AI-produced references or results in assessment are defined as falsification
Plagiarism is when a student uses someone else’s work, ideas or intellectual property, uses computer
programs or software (including the use of generative artificial intelligence platforms such as ChatGPT)
without proper acknowledgment by use of correct referencing conventions, or approved
method of declaration. Plagiarism may be written or non-written.
Falsification is when students attempt to present fabricated or distorted data, evidence, references,
citations or experimental results and/or knowingly make use of such material as part of an assessment.
This includes the use of generative artificial intelligence platforms, such as ChatGPT, to fabricate
experimental results or bibliography.
- The university does not set a standalone exam-only AI rule in the provided sources, but it states that cheating includes dishonest or unfair conduct before, during, or after examinations and summative tests
- Separately, curriculum guidance says the role of AI in assessment should be considered from the outset and assessment should be designed in such a way to make the best use of AI to support learning and digital skills
Cheating is when students act dishonestly or unfairly before, during, or after an examination or a
summative class (including online) test in order to gain advantage or assist another student to do so.
AI IN ASSESSMENT
The role of AI in an assessment should
be considered at the outset and the
assessment designed in such a way
to make the best use of AI to support
learning and the development of digital
skills.
- The university’s curriculum guidance supports building AI into learning and developing student AI literacy
- It states that opportunities to use AI are built into the curriculum and that students should be supported in learning how to find, create, and evaluate information from AI tools, including ethical and social aspects
Artificial Intelligence (AI) creates new
opportunities to provide students with
an interactive and engaging learning
experience, and improve learning
outcomes through adaptive and
personalised means of teaching.
Opportunities to use AI are built into the curriculum.
Authentic ways of using AI are considered, and have been built into the learning
activities to develop digital literacy.
Students are supported to learn how to find, create, and evaluate information from
AI tools.
AI skills and literacy are built into the curriculum/assessment.
Students are supported to understand the ethical, social and wellbeing aspects of AI.
- The university does not provide a programming-assignment-specific student rule in the provided sources
- However, curriculum guidance for educators states that AI may be used to produce teaching materials including code samples
AI may be used to:
• Produce teaching materials, such as
case studies, code samples, article
summaries, and translations.
Research
- Outside that assessment context, the provided sources do not define a broader research-data AI policy
- For assessed student work, the university prohibits using generative AI to fabricate experimental results or bibliography, classifying this as falsification
Falsification is when students attempt to present fabricated or distorted data, evidence, references,
citations or experimental results and/or knowingly make use of such material as part of an assessment.
This includes the use of generative artificial intelligence platforms, such as ChatGPT, to fabricate
experimental results or bibliography.
- The academic integrity regulations apply to postgraduate researchers up to thesis submission, after which the research degree regulations apply
- The university also requires students to follow ethical conventions and course requirements, but the provided sources do not define an AI-specific policy for grant proposals, ethics applications, or research integrity declarations
• Postgraduate researchers (PGR) when undertaking any module(s), taught element(s) or formative element(s)
of the Professional Doctorate where assessment falls under the Regulations for Taught Courses and should be
considered by an Academic Integrity Panel. Following the submission of a thesis the Regulations for
Research Degrees will apply.
• Ensure that they follow the ethical conventions and requirements appropriate to their course;
Academic Integrity
- Students are required to acknowledge the work of others appropriately
- For generative AI specifically, use without proper acknowledgment by correct referencing conventions or an approved declaration method is defined as plagiarism
• Fully acknowledge the work of others wherever it has contributed to their work by referencing
appropriately (further information can be found on the LDS webpages);
Plagiarism is when a student uses someone else’s work, ideas or intellectual property, uses computer
programs or software (including the use of generative artificial intelligence platforms such as ChatGPT)
without proper acknowledgment by use of correct referencing conventions, or approved
method of declaration. Plagiarism may be written or non-written.
- Suspected AI-related misconduct is enforced through the university’s academic integrity process rather than a separate AI system
- Academic staff may raise suspected breaches with evidence, poor academic practice may be handled through an exploratory meeting and referral for support, and upheld breaches can affect results, progression, final classification, and future study or career
Staff forms - suspected case of academic misconduct
If an academic member of staff wishes to raise a suspected breach of academic integrity, they should complete the below form, including any evidence and send it to
If a member of academic staff considers that a student has committed poor academic practice, an
exploratory meeting may be offered to the student to explain their concerns.
The student will be referred to the Learner Development Service to support their academic development. It
does not require a formal referral to the Academic Integrity Procedures, but a note will be recorded and will
be considered in the event of any future concerns about their work.
If a suspected breach of academic integrity is upheld, it could impact the student’s results profile,
progression and final classification. It could also impact their ability to engage in further studies and their
career.
Institutional & Administrative
- The university explicitly supports faculty use of AI in curriculum and assessment design and is piloting Copilot for staff productivity
- Educators are told they can use AI for curriculum design, lesson planning, assessment questions, sample answers, and teaching materials, while Copilot outputs used by staff must be subject to human oversight and cannot be the basis for decisions affecting individuals
The curriculum supports educators to
feel confident using AI effectively in
curriculum and assessment, and to view
it as a tool that can be used to support
all students, and to allow us all to adapt
to the fast-growing and ever-changing
educational technology environment.
AI may be used to:
• Generate ideas and drafts for
curriculum design, module outlines,
lesson plans and teaching activities.
• Create assessment questions, topics
for group projects, essay and exam
questions, and sample answers at
different performance levels.
• Produce teaching materials, such as
case studies, code samples, article
summaries, and translations.
The University is currently testing Microsoft 365 Copilot (Copilot) to boost staff productivity and efficiency. During the pilot phase, Copilot will be used across the M365 environment by a limited number of staff members.
No decision affecting an individual will be made based on Copilot's output. All direct outputs from Copilot come with the statement "AI-generated content may be incorrect," and our training emphasises that human oversight is always required to verify outputs.
- The provided sources identify Microsoft 365 Copilot as an institutionally used AI platform during a pilot phase for limited staff
- The university states that data used with Copilot is encrypted, stored in its UK Microsoft Azure tenant, not used to train Microsoft models, and any personal data use must rely on the lawful bases in its privacy notices, with ongoing risk assessment during the pilot
The University is currently testing Microsoft 365 Copilot (Copilot) to boost staff productivity and efficiency. During the pilot phase, Copilot will be used across the M365 environment by a limited number of staff members.
University data used with Copilot is encrypted and stored within our secure Microsoft Azure tenant, which is located in the UK and is not used for training Microsoft models.
When the University uses staff, student, or any other personal data with Copilot, it will do so under any of the lawful bases described in our privacy notices.
Following the pilot, an analysis of the use of Copilot for M365 will be conducted, reviewing the associated risks and benefits to determine subsequent steps. Any extended use of Copilot beyond the pilot will be considered under our risk assessment processes and the privacy notice will be updated accordingly. The deployment of Copilot will be monitored throughout the pilot phase, with risk assessments updated as needed.
- It also states that Copilot deployment is being piloted and monitored, with later decisions to be made through risk assessment and review of risks and benefits
- The university has an institutional direction to embed AI within curriculum and assessment as part of digital fluency, and it provides a reflective checklist for course and module leaders
fair, ethical, professional, and responsible use of generative AI tools. The University
is committed to preparing our students for an increasingly AI-enabled future and
acknowledge digital fluency as a key USW graduate attribute.
The checklist below has been designed for course and module leaders to self-evaluate their practice, to support Quality Assurance
(Re)Validation, Continuous Monitoring and Assessment Dialogue processes in reflecting on how Artificial Intelligence, as part of
digital fluency, is embedded in your curriculum.
Following the pilot, an analysis of the use of Copilot for M365 will be conducted, reviewing the associated risks and benefits to determine subsequent steps. Any extended use of Copilot beyond the pilot will be considered under our risk assessment processes and the privacy notice will be updated accordingly. The deployment of Copilot will be monitored throughout the pilot phase, with risk assessments updated as needed.
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 Wales Newport's AI Policies
University of Wales Newport has defined AI policies in 11 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 92%.
Students are required to acknowledge the work of others appropriately. For generative AI specifically, use without proper acknowledgment by correct referencing conventions or an approved declaration method is defined as plagiarism.
Suspected AI-related misconduct is enforced through the university’s academic integrity process rather than a separate AI system. Academic staff may raise suspected breaches with evidence, poor academic practice may be handled through an exploratory meeting and referral for support, and upheld breaches can affect results, progression, final classification, and future study or career.
The provided sources identify Microsoft 365 Copilot as an institutionally used AI platform during a pilot phase for limited staff. The university states that data used with Copilot is encrypted, stored in its UK Microsoft Azure tenant, not used to train Microsoft models, and any personal data use must rely on the lawful bases in its privacy notices, with ongoing risk assessment during the pilot.