1. Summary
This document provides guidelines on the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools for learning and research. Particularly, it provides guidance to students on the use of AI tools for completion of class assignments as well completion of undergraduate projects, dissertation and thesis.
AI is an emerging technology that finds application across different sectors; education inclusive. It presents significant benefits in the education such as effective decision making and problem solving in a time and cost effective manner. It is also offer significant pathway to radical transformation of the higher education by enhancing teaching, learning and research. This technology also supports innovation and advances the course of knowledge across different fields.
However, its unrestricted use pose significant ethical and academic challenges, thus, must be deployed by students responsible. ). As a University of Technology with a vision “to be a world-renowned university that is committed to developing and transforming society through environment-friendly technologies and other innovations”, there is a need to regulate the use of AI in learning and research. To facilitate responsible use of AI, this document provides regulation in the use of AI in the University’s learning and research environments.
Specifically, the aim of this document is to promote responsible use of AI in learning and research to uphold the highest academic standard and preserve the academic integrity and excellence of the institution.
This policy applies to all students (Undergraduates and postgraduates) as well as researchers who employ AI in problem in their academic pursuit.
2. Use of AI Generative Tool
AI generative tools could be used responsibly and irresponsibly. Responsible use involves the deployment within the boundary of institution’s policy and regulations in such a way that it does not constitute academic fraud. For instance, students can engage AI generative tools to obtain background information or idea about a concept or phenomenon and develop novel ideas based on the insights derived from such tools. Where such ideas reflects in the document, proper citation must be provided to acknowledge the original source.
Conversely, AI generative tools could be deployed in an irresponsible way. This comprises of verbatim copying of texts from the tool, failure to acknowledge the original source of paraphrased texts and presentation of AI demo datasets as original dataset and manipulating it to obtain results. These are considered as an act of holistic delegation of a task or research that a student is supposed to perform themselves to AI tool. It is considered as a form of academic fraud which violates academic integrity.
Large language models (LLMs) such as mea AI, ChatGPT, deepseek and Gemini are inherently unreliable, sometimes may provide incorrect or misleading information, and sometimes they are non-deterministic as the tool may generate different outputs each time it is engaged.
Academic research are built on reliable evidences supported by verifiable and authentic sources. Accordingly, even when the use of AI generative tool is permitted for the purpose of generating or rephrasing text, these tools are not an appropriate substitute for sources that can be assessed by an instructor or examiner. Hence, the regulation of its use will promote academic integrity, trust and reliability.
3. University AI Policy
The university policy is categorised into AI policy for undergraduate and postgraduate students.
3.1AI Policy for Undergraduate
The following are the recommended AI policy for undergraduate students:
1. All students have important obligations under the Student’s Conduct to complete all academic and scholarly activities with fairness, integrity and honesty. Therefore, students are not allowed to use AI generative tools for the completion of any laboratory, field work, or course assignment”. This is to maintain a culture of academic integrity and honesty.
2. Some course instructors may approve the use of AI generative AI tools for specific goals, in such a case, the guideline for use must be clearly stated by the course instructor in such a way that it will not constitute academic fraud or dent the image of the institution as the course instructor will be held accountable for any infraction or reputational damage to the institution. In addition, these tools should be used only by the students with the explicit and clear permission of each individual instructor, and then only in the ways allowed by the instructor, otherwise, it will be considered as an infraction.
3. In other words, tools described as ‘AI’ may be used in a specific course for purposes explicitly described by the course instructor in the syllabus or other written communication. In this case it is not a violation of academic integrity. However, if the use of AI is not explicitly permitted, it is prohibited by default.
4. Furthermore, when the sources of the AI generated texts are verified or authenticated as reliable, students are allowed to paraphrase words or sentences obtained from AI generative tools in a way that is completely different from the generated text and where appropriate, proper citations must be provided to acknowledge the original source.
5. Where students paraphrase text or ideas generated from AI tools without proper acknowledgement of the original source, it should be considered as academic dishonesty and infractions
6. For projects, texts generated from the AI tools must be less than 5% 20/25%. Various project supervisors must check students’ project to ensure that this condition is met and all Department must ensure that this condition is met amongst others before fielding any final year student for external examination.
7. Research conducted using inbuilt AI demo examples or datasets violate this University’s regulations on responsible use of AI. Use of AI demos without the knowledge of the system’s training data, how it was obtained or modelled is considered an infraction on academic integrity. This may also include the presentation of AI demo datasets as original dataset and manipulating it to obtain results.
NB:
1. Any infraction on the above mentioned regulations should be considered as academic misconduct and a note of warning should be served to the erring student followed by official report to the University Committee on Academic Misconduct for appropriate sanction should the infractions persist after warning.
2. Suspected cases should first be subject to a formal investigation by the instructor/supervisor/Department. If the investigation determines that there was a departure from academic integrity, a report will be filed with the University Committee on Academic Misconduct, who will administer remedies or penalties/sanctions, which could include warning, suspension or requirement to withdraw from the university depending on the gravity.
3. In accordance with this policy, If a student is unsure of the AI tools whose use violate this policies, clarity should be sought from the course instructor or department as no student will be exonerated from the consequences of infringing on any of these policies on the basis of ignorance.
3.2AI Policy for Postgraduate
The following are the recommended AI policy for postgraduate students
1. All students have important obligations under the Student’s Conduct to complete all academic and scholarly activities with fairness, integrity and honesty. Therefore, students are not allowed to use AI generative tools for the completion of any laboratory, field work, or course assignment”. This is to maintain a culture of academic integrity and honesty.
2. Some course instructors may approve the use of AI generative AI tools for specific goals, in such a case, the guideline for use must be clearly stated by the course instructor in such a way that it will not constitute academic fraud or dent the image of the institution as the course instructor will be held accountable for any infraction or reputational damage to the institution. In addition, these tools should be used only by the students with the explicit and clear permission of each individual instructor, and then only in the ways allowed by the instructor, otherwise, it will be considered as an infraction.
In other words, tools described as ‘AI’ may be used in a specific course for purposes explicitly described by the course instructor in the syllabus or other written communication. In this case it is not a violation of academic integrity. However, if the use of AI is not explicitly permitted, it is prohibited by default.
3. Furthermore, when the sources of the AI generated texts are verified or authenticated as reliable, students are allowed to paraphrase words or sentences obtained from AI generative tools in a way that is completely different from the generated text (In other words, with 0% 10/15% similarity) and where appropriate, proper citations must be provided to acknowledge the original source.
4. Where students paraphrase text or ideas generated from AI tools without proper acknowledgement of the original source, it should be considered as academic dishonesty and infractions.
5. For dissertation and thesis, no text must be generated from the AI tools verbatim (There is 0% tolerance for verbatim texts generated from AI tools). It is therefore each student’s responsibility to assess the validity and applicability of any generative AI tool output that is submitted as they bear the final responsibility. Violations of this policy will be considered academic misconduct. Furthermore, various project supervisors must check students’ project to ensure that this condition is met amongst others and all Departmentsmust ensure that this condition is met amongst others before fielding students for any stage of presentation.
6. It is expected that all students work at this level of study will be original as ability for persistent and independent study are major criteria for admission at the postgraduatelevel. In instances where collaborative work is assigned, it is expected that the names and matriculation numbers of all the team members who participated be listed on the front page of the document as they will be jointly held accountable for any infraction. The University specifically forbid the verbatim use of Meta AI or ChatGPT or any other generative AI tools at all stages of the work process, including preliminary ones. Violations of this policy will be considered academic misconduct.
8. Research conducted using inbuilt AI demo examples or datasets violate this University’s regulations on responsible use of AI. Use of AI demos without the knowledge of the system’s training data, how it was obtained or modelled is considered an infraction on academic integrity. This may also include the presentation of AI demo datasets as original dataset and manipulating it to obtain results.
NB:
1. Any infraction on the above mentioned regulations should be considered as academic misconduct and a note of warning should be served to the erring student followed by official report to the University Committee on Academic Misconduct for appropriate sanction should the infractions persist after warning.
2. Suspected cases should first be subject to a formal investigation by the instructor/supervisor/Department. If the investigation determines that there was a departure from academic integrity, a report will be filed with the University Committee on Academic Misconduct, who will administer remedies or penalties/sanctions, which could include warning, suspension or requirement to withdraw from the university depending on the gravity.
3. In accordance with this policy, If a student is unsure of the AI tools whose use violate this policies, clarity should be sought from the course instructor or department as no student will be exonerated from the consequences of infringing on any of these policies on the basis of ignorance.
3.3AI Policy for Reviewer
Uploading student’s report into any AI before University approval is an infraction against the integrity of the work. Under any circumstances should reviewer’s upload, copy and paste student’s report unto AI. Once uploaded, the report becomes a part of the AI’s database. Hence, reviewers must refrain themselves under any circumstances from typing, copying and pasting, or uploading student’s report partly or wholly into AI for review purpose; whether title, aim, objective(s), statement of problems, references, etc. This will be considered as academic misconduct.
4. Policy Enforcement
In order to ensure total compliance of the policy after approval, students will be required to present evidence of compliance during clearance to the AI Committee.
5. Policy Tenure
Knowing fully well the dynamism in AI and IT in general, the tenure of this policy will be 1 year. Hence, it will be subjected to annual review to accommodate new updates in tandem with global trends.
Bells University of Technology as a reputable University of Technology and Innovation supports responsible use of AI generative tools. However there are cautions and important ethical considerations that must be ensured while engaging these tools. These include: reliability and authencity of information, information security and data privacy, compliance, copyright, and academic integrity. Therefore, this policy on University’s regulations on AI is compiled to enhance appropriate use of generative AI tools in courses and for research purpose. Students and researchers are encouraged to abide by this policy as adherence to the University’s academicintegrity standard is part of ethics, professionalism, and respect.
Lastly, ignorance is not a defense. Students and members of staff who are unsure that they understand this policy on AI are encouraged to seek clarity with the relevant person or department.