Teaching & Learning
- The university states that AI use beyond what is permitted for an assessment can be treated as academic misconduct
- Students are responsible for checking what is allowed in each assessment and for ensuring submitted work remains their own
- For taught students, use of generative AI in coursework is governed by an acceptable-assistance framework and may be permitted, prohibited, or restricted depending on the assessment and module-level rules
The AI category assigned to an assessment determines whether and how Generative AI tools can be used by students for completing that assessment.
Students are responsible for checking the AI category and understanding what is and isn’t acceptable with respect to use of Generative AI in their assessments.
Any use of Generative AI tools and resources to support assessments outside of what is defined in the assignment brief as acceptable assistance is not permitted.
Where AI use is not restricted, students are expected to use AI responsibly to support their learning, while ensuring that submitted work remains their own and they can evidence their learning process if required.
The level of AI support for each assessment should be stated clearly in the assignment brief and explained to students.
- Staff are expected to state the permitted level of AI support clearly in the assignment or assessment brief
- Students must follow the stated AI category for each assessment, and using AI where it is not authorized is not permitted
- The university applies the same assessment-category approach to exams and other formal assessments: whether AI is allowed depends on the specific assessment brief
The AI category assigned to an assessment determines whether and how Generative AI tools can be used by students for completing that assessment.
Any use of Generative AI tools and resources to support assessments outside of what is defined in the assignment brief as acceptable assistance is not permitted.
The level of AI support for each assessment should be stated clearly in the assignment brief and explained to students.
This webpage gives guidance on what AI use in assessed work is and isn't allowed according to the category assigned to your assessment.
- Students are warned to use AI critically because outputs may be inaccurate or biased, and they remain responsible for the final work they submit
- The university permits students to use AI tools to support personal learning and study, such as exploring ideas, creating plans, and getting feedback, provided this use does not replace their own learning and they follow assessment-specific limits
You can use AI as a study tool to support your learning.
Used effectively, AI can support your learning and development. AI tools can help you understand concepts, ask questions and receive support, create a study plan, organise your workload and support your revision. You can use AI to generate and refine ideas and get feedback on drafts.
You are responsible for the work you submit, not the AI tool.
Always verify AI-generated outputs and use trusted sources in your work.
AI use is not prohibited across all assessments. Each assessment should have an AI category to tell you what level of AI use is acceptable for that task.
- Where AI use is allowed, students must still ensure the submitted work is their own
- The university does not set a separate institution-wide rule specifically for AI code generation in student programming work
- Instead, coding-related AI use falls under the assessment-category and acceptable-assistance rules for taught assessments, so permission depends on the assessment brief
The AI category assigned to an assessment determines whether and how Generative AI tools can be used by students for completing that assessment.
Any use of Generative AI tools and resources to support assessments outside of what is defined in the assignment brief as acceptable assistance is not permitted.
Where AI use is not restricted, students are expected to use AI responsibly to support their learning, while ensuring that submitted work remains their own and they can evidence their learning process if required.
Research
- The policy also indicates that AI use in theses and dissertations may be restricted or prohibited for some tasks unless explicitly permitted
- AI tools must not be listed as authors, and any significant use must be appropriately acknowledged according to disciplinary norms or specific requirements
- For research degrees, students may use AI in limited ways to support writing, but they remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of submitted work
Research students may use Generative AI tools in the preparation of assessments for formative purposes, if this is made clear as acceptable for the assessment task in question.
The use of generative AI tools in preparing work for summative assessment is not permitted except as described in the Guidance Note on use of generative AI by research students and in line with the Policy on the Use of AI in Taught Assessments where relevant.
You remain responsible for the accuracy, validity and originality of your work, even if you have used AI tools in its preparation.
AI tools cannot be listed as authors on publications.
If you use AI tools in a way that materially affects the content of your thesis, dissertation, paper or other research output, you should acknowledge this appropriately, in line with disciplinary norms, publisher requirements, or University guidance.
- Any AI-assisted analysis or data handling remains the researcher's responsibility
- Researchers must not input personal, confidential, or sensitive research data into public AI tools unless appropriate safeguards and approvals are in place
- The university allows researchers to consider AI for research-related tasks, but requires careful attention to accuracy, confidentiality, ethics, and legal obligations
Researchers should not upload personal data, confidential information, or unpublished research data into publicly available Generative AI tools unless they are satisfied that appropriate contractual, legal, ethical and information security safeguards are in place.
You remain responsible for the accuracy, validity and originality of your work, even if you have used AI tools in its preparation.
When using Generative AI tools in research, you must consider issues of confidentiality, data protection, intellectual property, research ethics, bias, reproducibility and accountability.
- AI use does not remove the human researcher's responsibility for the work
- Where AI materially affects research outputs, that use should be acknowledged appropriately
- The university explicitly requires researchers and research students to consider AI use through the lens of research integrity, ethics, confidentiality, data protection, bias, reproducibility, and accountability
When using Generative AI tools in research, you must consider issues of confidentiality, data protection, intellectual property, research ethics, bias, reproducibility and accountability.
You remain responsible for the accuracy, validity and originality of your work, even if you have used AI tools in its preparation.
If you use AI tools in a way that materially affects the content of your thesis, dissertation, paper or other research output, you should acknowledge this appropriately, in line with disciplinary norms, publisher requirements, or University guidance.
Academic Integrity
- Students are instructed to check the assessment brief for expectations, and research outputs that are materially affected by AI should be acknowledged appropriately
- The university requires transparency about AI use when it materially contributes to assessed or research work, but the exact form of disclosure depends on the context and any module, disciplinary, publisher, or university requirements
Students are responsible for checking the AI category and understanding what is and isn’t acceptable with respect to use of Generative AI in their assessments.
The level of AI support for each assessment should be stated clearly in the assignment brief and explained to students.
If you use AI tools in a way that materially affects the content of your thesis, dissertation, paper or other research output, you should acknowledge this appropriately, in line with disciplinary norms, publisher requirements, or University guidance.
- Students may be asked to evidence their learning process where AI use is allowed
- It emphasizes acceptable-assistance rules rather than endorsing a specific AI detection product in the cited materials
- The university states that unauthorized AI use in assessments is not permitted and may lead to academic misconduct processes
Any use of Generative AI tools and resources to support assessments outside of what is defined in the assignment brief as acceptable assistance is not permitted.
Where AI use is not restricted, students are expected to use AI responsibly to support their learning, while ensuring that submitted work remains their own and they can evidence their learning process if required.
The penalties for inappropriate use of AI in assessments are the same as for any other form of academic misconduct.
Institutional & Administrative
- The institution also provides staff guidance and approved tools to support this use
- The university permits staff to use AI in teaching and administrative work, but expects them to do so responsibly and with human oversight
- Staff are told to avoid delegating professional judgment to AI and to ensure assessment design, student guidance, and any outputs used in teaching are reviewed carefully
Staff can use Generative AI to support teaching and assessment, but must do so responsibly and in line with University policies.
You should not rely on Generative AI tools to make professional judgements.
The level of AI support for each assessment should be stated clearly in the assignment brief and explained to students.
Human oversight is essential when using AI-generated content in teaching, feedback or administration.
- The university sets data-protection limits on AI use based on information classification and directs staff and students toward institutionally supported tools
- York also maintains approved guidance pages for tools including Microsoft Copilot, Google Gemini, and NotebookLM, alongside data privacy impact assessment requirements
- Users must not enter confidential, personal, or otherwise restricted university information into AI systems unless the platform and safeguards are appropriate for that data classification
You must only use information in AI tools in ways that are appropriate to its classification.
Do not input personal data, confidential information, or commercially sensitive information into AI tools unless you are sure that the tool has been approved for that type of information.
Before using a new system or tool that processes personal data, you may need to complete a Data Privacy Impact Assessment (DPIA).
The University supports the use of a number of Generative AI tools for work and study.
- The university has an institution-level AI position and governance framework that presents AI as a strategic priority while emphasizing ethical, responsible, and human-centered use
- Its materials describe principles, governance, best practice, and dedicated strands for education and research, indicating coordinated university-wide oversight rather than isolated local policies
Artificial intelligence (AI) is a strategic priority for the University of York.
Our approach to AI is guided by our institutional values and commitment to ethical, responsible and inclusive innovation.
This section sets out the University’s position on AI, how we are approaching its use in education, research and professional services, and the governance and best practice that supports this work.
We are developing our approach to AI through governance, guidance and practical support for staff and students.
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 York's AI Policies
University of York has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
The university requires transparency about AI use when it materially contributes to assessed or research work, but the exact form of disclosure depends on the context and any module, disciplinary, publisher, or university requirements. Students are instructed to check the assessment brief for expectations, and research outputs that are materially affected by AI should be acknowledged appropriately.
The university states that unauthorized AI use in assessments is not permitted and may lead to academic misconduct processes. It emphasizes acceptable-assistance rules rather than endorsing a specific AI detection product in the cited materials. Students may be asked to evidence their learning process where AI use is allowed.
The university sets data-protection limits on AI use based on information classification and directs staff and students toward institutionally supported tools. Users must not enter confidential, personal, or otherwise restricted university information into AI systems unless the platform and safeguards are appropriate for that data classification. York also maintains approved guidance pages for tools including Microsoft Copilot, Google Gemini, and NotebookLM, alongside data privacy impact assessment requirements.