# data[].attributes.body
Academic Misconduct: confused about tools they can use and at what point should they stop using them.

# data[].attributes.body
Some students are saying that Dragon software is leading to accusations of misconduct.

# data[].attributes.body
Why not chatGPT if I can use Grammarly.

# data[].attributes.body
Allowing translations tools would fail our OFS commitments to test english language competency

# data[].attributes.body
Students writing something and putting the whole thing through as a translation tool

# data[].attributes.body
specific questions about whether students could use Grammarly, referencing this post which we hadn’t seen before:

https://student.sussex.ac.uk/experience/blog?id=64017

# data[].attributes.body
How much can I use it to assist my learning? e.g. summarising chapters; asking how to demonstrate critical thinking

# data[].attributes.body
Staff concerned about what AI tool to advise students to use when asking students to use AI in teaching & learning

# data[].attributes.body
'Citation machine' is a tool that students are saying that they've used

# data[].attributes.body
QAA have launched a consultation on their new Quality Code here which inc ref to AI in section 11: https://www.qaa.ac.uk/the-quality-code/redeveloping-the-quality-code-23-24/consultation

g. Providers work in partnership with staff and students to establish coherent approaches to technology in teaching, learning and assessment (such as Generative Artificial Intelligence).

# data[].attributes.body
Grammarly is recommended following some needs assessments

# data[].attributes.body
Provide guidance to students on the limitations and being clear about myths they might believe

# data[].attributes.body
If you use AI, keep copies of how, in case you're brought before an academic misconduct panel

# data[].attributes.body
Misconceptions around generative AI

Generative AI tools, like ChatGPT Bing and Bard, are not primary sources of information. Instead, they are language processing models. Whilst they can provide useful information and help generate ideas, they do not independently verify the facts, understand context, think, or feel like humans.

What this means is that the text generated by AI tools can sometimes be factually incorrect. Therefore, it is crucial that you critically review all outputs generated by these tools rather than blindly accept the content as correct.

Think of Generative AI as a starting point, much like Wikipedia. Both can give you an initial understanding of a subject or a quick overview. But remember, for academic assignments, you will need more rigorous sources.

While Wikipedia isn't typically an acceptable citation for academic work, neither are generative AI tools.  They're great tools to begin your research, but they shouldn't be your main or only sources.

Always turn to reputable, peer-reviewed scholarly materials for in-depth research. And remember, copying and pasting content, whether from a website or AI-generated material, isn't permissible. It's plagiarism.

Where is the best place to look for credible sources of information?

Module-based reading lists have a carefully selected range of resources such as textbooks, journal articles, and web-based articles. These resources have been chosen by your module convenor to support the learning outcomes for each module, and so can be relied on for accuracy and relevance.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The University of Kent encourages the ethical and responsible use of generative AI to improve learning. Therefore, you are permitted to use it to enhance your studies. However, please speak with your module convenor if the assessment guidelines for your modules have not been updated yet, to ensure that the use of generative AI tools is allowed in the manner you are using them.

Assessing the value of AI for a specific purpose

Before using generative AI, you should ask yourself the following questions:

1. Will using this tool save me time and enhance my learning - or will it distract me from the task at hand?

2. Am I using it in an ethical way that aligns with Kent's Academic Integrity policy?

3. How will I verify or fact-check the output created by the generative AI tool?

4. Have I considered the implications of AI on my critical thinking and analytical skills?

Misconceptions around generative AI

Generative AI tools, like ChatGPT Bing and Bard, are not primary sources of information. Instead, they are language processing models. Whilst they can provide useful information and help generate ideas, they do not independently verify the facts, understand context, think, or feel like humans.

What this means is that the text generated by AI tools can sometimes be factually incorrect. Therefore, it is crucial that you critically review all outputs generated by these tools rather than blindly accept the content as correct.

Think of Generative AI as a starting point, much like Wikipedia. Both can give you an initial understanding of a subject or a quick overview. But remember, for academic assignments, you will need more rigorous sources.

While Wikipedia isn't typically an acceptable citation for academic work, neither are generative AI tools. They're great tools to begin your research, but they shouldn't be your main or only sources.

Always turn to reputable, peer-reviewed scholarly materials for in-depth research. And remember, copying and pasting content, whether from a website or AI-generated material, isn't permissible. It's plagiarism.

Where is the best place to look for credible sources of information?

Module-based reading lists have a carefully selected range of resources such as textbooks, journal articles, and web-based articles. These resources have been chosen by your module convenor to support the learning outcomes for each module, and so can be relied on for accuracy and relevance.

Protecting privacy

Generative AI tools are trained on vast amounts of data. This includes the information you enter when using the tools.

For most Generative AI tools, when signing up to use the tool, you grant the providers the right to use your content to train the models that power the tool. This could result in the content you enter into the tool becoming publicly available.

Some tools such as ChatGPT allow you to opt out, meaning your interactions with the tool will not be used to train their models.

As such, it is recommended you always check the terms and conditions of the generative AI tool you plan to use to understand the rights that you grant to the providers to re-use the content you enter into the tool.

You should not upload content to generative AI tools without the permission of the copyright holder. This includes text, images, data, songs, videos, and other copyrighted works. If you do not have clear permission from the copyright owner to use their content with the generative AI tools, do not upload it.

For more information, please see the University Copyright pages

Keeping track of your interactions with generative AI

If your module convenor has informed you that the use of AI is permitted for an assignment, it's a good idea to save copies of your interactions (prompts and outputs) with the tool and your assignment drafts. This will help you create a record that can be shared with your teachers and convenors to provide greater transparency on how and where you have used generative AI in your assignment.

Citing and acknowledging the use of AI

When permitted to use Generative AI tools in your assignments, the module's assessment instructions will detail how to acknowledge their usage appropriately.

For instance, you may be instructed to:

1. Add a specific statement clarifying if you have used generative AI tools in your work.

2. Document the tool used, the prompts given, the outputs created by the tool, and any alterations made to the tool's outputs.

3. Provide a reflection on your experience with Generative AI, and share insights from your interaction with it.

Original Work, Not AI Duplicates

It's important to remember that while generative AI can provide helpful ideas and suggestions, it's crucial that you express your own voice and perspective in your work. Simply adjusting content generated by these tools is not enough to make it truly your own. To produce authentic work and genuine learning, you must demonstrate your own critical thinking and reasoning.

Tip

Avoid using generative AI tools to write into your assignments directly. Instead, use them to aid comprehension and then close the tool before writing. This way, you can ensure the writing is your own.

Key Point

It's important to remember that as you progress through your studies, you will incrementally acquire skills through assignments and assessments that you will need to use later. Skipping this important step by relying too heavily on generative AI may come back to haunt you when faced with more advanced tasks, such as writing a dissertation.

If you need assistance with your assessments or any part of your studies, there are lots of places you can go for support.

Student Learning Advisory Service (SLAS)

SLAS offer study skills, writing, maths, assignment and revision support to all students, from foundation to PhD. Whether you are studying part-time, full-time or on an apprenticeship programme, our workshops and 1-1 appointments, delivered both online and face-to-face, will help you achieve your academic potential

Library Research Skills

This Moodle module covers key library research skills to support your studies and employability.
You can work your way through the whole module or pick and choose sections depending on the skills you need to develop

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Some guidelines around the use of generative AI to help students' studies

# data[].attributes.body
Students should have awareness that staff are not allowed to use AI detector tools (policy tells them not to do this with student work), although wording of this would need to be considered so we don't give them carte blanche to cheat

# data[].attributes.body
Extract:

2. A proof reader should not make any changes directly to the work, but should suggest changes by writing on a hard copy or using Track Changes/ comments etc. The proposals made by a proofreader should be retained by the student in case a concern regarding misconduct is raised.

3. No substantial changes to the content should be made, the extent of which would constitute the content being produced or substantively produced by the proofreader without correct citation.

Therefore, a proofreader may not:

Rewrite sections where argumentation or logic is unclear.

Rewrite sections to improve paraphrasing.

Rearrange paragraphs and sentences with the intention of improving structure.

Rearrange paragraphs and sentences with the intention of improving the argument.

Correct calculations, data, or factual errors etc.

Make any changes or correction to the references and bibliography.

A proofreader may:

Identify errors in grammar, vocabulary, expression and word order only making specific minor suggestions where the communication is clear.

Highlight areas where communication is unclear or where there is inconsistent use of a referencing system.

# data[].attributes.body
If you use AI you're unlikely to pass because of...

# data[].attributes.body
Link to 3 statements on AI usage

# data[].attributes.body
Surface proofreading policy and the extent to which AI/Grammarly can be used

# data[].attributes.body
AI won't help you to improve your understanding

# data[].attributes.body
Recognise difficulties and barriers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Read guidance on the University of Sussex policy relevant to AI in assessment, and on allowing and acknowledging its use.

Academic misconduct and AI detection

The baseline position of the University is Sussex is that the use of generative AI material in assessment submissions is prohibited, unless explicitly permitted by the module convenor.

Personation policy, terminology and process

The University of Sussex policy on academic misconduct via 'personation' was expanded in January 2023 to include AI generated text or content. The policy now defines personation in written submissions as:
"...where someone, or software (unless explicitly permitted in the assessment guidance from the module convenor) other than the student prepares the work, part of the work, or provides substantial assistance with work submitted for assessment. This includes but is not limited to: AI generated text or responses."
As with any case of suspected personation, suspected cases should be reported by module convenors to their school investigating officer. Cases may be referred to an academic misconduct panel which will consider evidence and make a determination based on balance of probability.

Proof reading policy

The University of Sussex proof reading policy currently states that proof reading should be limited to minor language correction. This can include errors in grammar, vocabulary, expression and word order. However, specific minor suggestions for language correction should only be made when communication and meaning is clear to the reader.

If you have any queries please contact academicmisconduct@sussex.ac.uk.

Guidance on AI detection

As with all cases of personation, it can be difficult to detect when AI has been used to produce student submissions.

AI detection tools (do not use)

Please do not submit student work to online AI detection tools. There are many such tools but, ultimately, there are no independently validated tools that can reliably and accurately detect generative AI-produced material. Even Open AI, the creators of ChatGPT, have failed to produce a reliable AI classifier.

In addition to detection tools being inconsistent, the results of such checkers are biased. See for example, this 2023 paper from Stanford researchers: GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers

Finally, by using such tools you will be sharing student work with unregulated sites and further feeding the AI tools.

Possible indicators of AI generated text

While none of the following will enable you to definitively identify the use of generative AI, they may be a useful starting point for your thinking:

the points and conclusions lack insight

the writing circles around the same points without making progression of argument

appearance of non-sequiturs in the prose, such as non-logical progression or statements not relating to things that have come before

out-of-sequence numerical values, e.g., a numbered list might start at '2,' or there might be a gap between numbering

non-logical use of data, e.g. "...the rate increased from 5% to 2%"

alternating between UK and US English

non-current references. This may be an indicator due to a time delay when AI tools last scanned the internet

use of arcane or flowery language.

(adapted from the University of Brighton)

Guidance on AI use in assessment

As explained in the University's March 2023 statement on Advances in Technology and Academic Integrity, the University acknowledges that the use of AI in some disciplines is valid. There are lots of reasons why you might allow students to use AI in their learning and assessments. One reason may be that, by asking your students to be transparent in how they've used such tools, you will be able to provide feedback on whether they've used the tools effectively, or not.

If you do allow the use of generative AI, it is essential that you are clear with students on what is, and is not, permitted in your module.

This guidance ensures that permissions for the use of AI in all modules are communicated clearly and consistently.

Please also make time in class to talk with students about both the rationale for, and implications of, such permissions and how students might use such tools for self-directed learning.

You should also discuss with colleagues and marking teams the implications of such statements for applying marking criteria, i.e. if permitted, then students should not be penalised for acknowledging the use of AI. Your school may also have a policy about acceptable use.

Provide module level statements on the use of AI in assessment

To ensure clarity and consistency, and to reinforce the reliability of assessments, we recommend you include one of the following module level statements on the acceptable use of generative AI in all modules.

Where such statements are located will vary depending on your School's Canvas Template. If unsure about your School's preferred approach, please check with your Director for Teaching and Learning.

Module statement 1: Generative AI tools must not be used to generate any materials or content for assessments in this module.

Full statement (please copy)

Generative AI tools must not be used to generate any materials or content for assessments in this module. In this module, you must not use generative artificial intelligence (AI) to generate any materials or content for your assessment submissions.

Note that:

The baseline position at the University is Sussex is that the use of generative AI material in assessment submissions is prohibited, unless explicitly permitted by the module convenor.

Students registered with the Disability Advice team and in receipt of reasonable adjustments are still permitted to use other assistive technology as required.

If in any doubt about what is permissible, students should check with the module convenor.

Module statement 2: Generative AI tools may be used for some assessments in this module.

Choose this option if generative AI use conditions vary across assessments in your module or if types or ways of AI use is restricted for one or more assessments.

Please also accompany this unit level statement with additional assessment level statements (see section below) for each assessment task.

Full statement (please copy)

Generative AI tools may be used for some assessments in this module. Please refer to the guidance on the acceptable use of generative AI provided in your assessment task descriptions.

Note that:

Such permissions are for specific assessments and in this module only. You should not assume they apply in other modules.

Please contact the module convenor if you are at all unsure about what is/is not permitted regarding the use of generative AI tools in this module.

Adapted from: Monash University: Policy and practice guidance around acceptable and responsible use of AI technologies

Provide assessment level statements on the use of AI

If you have selected module level statement 2, an additional statement on acceptable/unacceptable use should be provided in the assessment task description, using one of the following options:

Assessment statement 1: Generative AI tools must not be used to generate any materials or content for this assessment.

Full statement (please copy)

Generative AI tools must not be used to generate any materials or content for this assessment: The purpose and format of this assessment makes it inappropriate or impractical for AI tools to be used.

Students registered with the Disability Advice team and in receipt of reasonable adjustments are still permitted to use other assistive technology as required.

When to choose this option

Assessments where the use of AI is wholly inappropriate for the delivery of the specific learning activities or skills to be assessed might include, for example, demonstrating foundation level skills such as remembering, understanding, independently developing critical thinking skills, and applying knowledge or demonstrating fundamental skills that will be required throughout the programme.

Such assessments are likely to be designed to support the development of knowledge and skills that students will require in order to be able to study successfully and effectively, including with the use of AI tools in other contexts and in future assessments. Discussion with students will be required to explain the rationale for this category (for example, pedagogy, employability, etc).

Examples of assessments where AI might not normally be used could include:

In-person unseen examinations

Online examinations

Class tests

Vivas

Some laboratories and practicals

Discussion-based assessments

Assessment statement 2:  Generative AI tools can be used in an assistive role:

Students are permitted to use AI tools for specific defined processes within the assessment​.

Full statement (please copy)

Generative AI tools can be used in an assistive role: You are permitted to use generative AI tools for specific defined processes within this assessment​.

You are permitted to use generative AI to:
[**provide list**]
However, you are NOT permitted to use generative AI tools to:
[**provide list**] Please note also:

You will be required to include a clear acknowledgement of the generative AI tools you have used in your submission. [**insert instructions on how to acknowledge**]. Therefore, when using generative AI tools please ensure you keep a record of your prompts, the outputs and how you used them to inform/develop your final submission.

Students are not permitted to use generative AI for assessed submissions unless explicit permission is given by the module convenor (as done here). Therefore, permission to use generative AI tools as outlined above is for this module only.

Please contact the module convenor if you are at all unsure about what is/is not permitted regarding the use of generative AI tools in this module.

When to choose this option

AI tools can be used to enhance and support the development of specific skills in specific ways, as specified by the tutor and required by the assessment. For instance, students might use AI for tasks such as data analysis, pattern recognition, ideation or generating insights.

Here the tutor should support and guide the students in the use of AI to ensure equity of experience, but the use of AI is not in itself a learning outcome. There will be some aspects of the assessment where the use of AI is inappropriate.

Examples of assessments where AI might be used in an assistive capacity include:

drafting and structuring content;

supporting the writing process in a limited manner;

as a support tutor;

supporting a particular process such as testing code or translating content;

giving feedback on content, or proofreading content (within the confines of the University of Sussex proof reading policy)

Example statement
Artificial Intelligence (AI) text generation tools can be used to help organise and plan your work, under the following circumstances:
You are permitted to use generative AI functionality within Adobe Firefly for the following tasks:

AI text-to-image tools can also be used for:

generating images of your researched personas (i.e. after research)

to help you with ideation

to create settings/backdrops for your designs (e.g. when presenting backgrounds for rendering)

AI text generation tools can be used for organising and planning your work

However, they should not be used to meet the learning outcomes for you! Therefore, you do not have permission to use them for:

Writing your portfolio

Creating or undertaking research for you

Presenting imagery created using AI as your own

Please note also:

You will be required to include a clear acknowledgement of the generative AI tools you have used in your submission by including this Acknowldge, Describe, Evidence template as an appendix to your submission. Therefore, when using generative AI tools please ensure you keep a record of your prompts, the outputs and how you used them to inform/develop your final submission.

Students are not permitted to use generative AI for assessed submissions unless explicit permission is given by the module convenor (as I have done here). Therefore, permission to use generative AI tools as outlined above is for this module only.

Students registered with the Disability Advice team and in receipt of reasonable adjustments are/may still be permitted to use other assistive technology as required.

Please contact me (your module convenor) if you are at all unsure about what is/is not permitted regarding the use of generative AI tools in this module.

Assessment statement 3: Generative AI has an integral role.

AI can be used as a primary tool throughout the assessment process.

Full statement (please copy)

Generative AI has an integral role: AI can be used as a primary tool throughout the assessment process.

You are permitted to use generative AI to:
[**provide list / refer to fuller task description**]
However, you are NOT permitted to use generative AI tools to:
[**provide list**] Please note also:

You will be required to include a clear acknowledgement of the generative AI tools you have used in your submission. [**insert instructions on how to acknowledge**]. Therefore, when using generative AI tools please ensure you keep a record of your prompts, the outputs and how you used them to inform/develop your final submission.

Students are not permitted to use generative AI for assessed submissions unless explicit permission is given by the module convenor (as done here). Therefore, permission to use generative AI tools as outlined above is for this module only.

Please contact the module convenor if you are at all unsure about what is/is not permitted regarding the use of generative AI tools in this module.

When to choose this option

Students will demonstrate their ability to use AI tools effectively and critically to tackle complex problems, make informed judgments, and generate creative solutions. The assessment will provide an opportunity to demonstrate effective and responsible use of AI.

The tutor should support and guide the students in the use of AI to ensure equity of experience.

Note that this option should ONLY be used with AI tools that are supported by the University of Sussex (expand for details).

No assessment should require students to use applications that are not licensed by the University of Sussex. If unsure, please contact Educational Enhancement.

Currently, this is restricted to AI functionality within the following licensed applications:

Adobe Firefly (text to image generation)

We anticipate that this list will grow over time.

Examples of where AI tools could be used as an integral part of the assessment include:

drafting and structuring content;

generating ideas;

comparing content (AI generated and human generated);

creating content in particular styles;

producing summaries;

analysing content;

reframing content;

researching and seeking answers;

creating artwork (images, audio and videos);

playing a Socrative role and engaging in a conversational discussion;

developing code;

translating content;

generating initial content to be critiqued by students.

Adapted from UCL: Using AI tools in assessment

Guidance on acknowledging the use of AI

If you allow the use of AI sources in assessed work, you should provide guidance to students on how to acknowledge, describe and evidence its use in their submissions.

For example, students could be asked to include a declaration in their submission which:

provides a written acknowledgment of the use of generative artificial intelligence

specifies which technology was used

includes explicit descriptions of how the information was generated

identifies the prompts used

explains how the output was used in their work.

A suggested format is:
I acknowledge the use of [1. insert AI system(s) and link] on [date] to [2.specific use of generative artificial intelligence]. The prompts used include [3. list of prompts]. The output from these prompts was used to [4. explain use].
You might also provide your students with a pre-formatted cover sheet or appendix section. Here's one example cover sheet. (links to Sussex Box folder)

While you may wish to tailor such guidance to your module, please also try to ensure consistency for students. For example, your School may have a recommended approach.

Adapted from: University of Sheffield: Generative AI in Assessment and UCL: Using AI tools in assessment

Guidance for students

Students should be aware of guidance about academic misconduct on the Student Hub.
See more from Artificial Intelligence in teaching and assessment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Guidance on why and how to incorporate generative artificial intelligence (AI) into your teaching and assessment.