Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education Policy
This document outlines the University of Guyana's policy on the use of Artificial Intelligence in education, addressing academic integrity, student and lecturer responsibilities, and appropriate use. It establishes guidelines for full disclosure, grading rubrics that account for AI assistance, and support systems to ensure fair and ethical educational experiences. The policy also emphasizes the need for continuous monitoring, infrastructural support, and inclusivity for students with special educational needs.
Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.
Who issued it
Who it governs
This policy is for students, lecturers, and support service units at the University of Guyana to guide their responsible use of AI tools.
What the document contains
The policy covers the responsible and transparent use of AI tools in teaching, learning, and assessment processes at the University of Guyana. It details specific guidelines for lecturers and students, including grading adjustments, tool subscription differences, detection procedures, and accommodations for students with disabilities.
The text does not include legally binding national regulations or sanctions outside of the University's internal grievance and disciplinary procedures.
- Academic integrity must never be compromised by the use of AI tools in education.
- Students and lecturers are required to provide full disclosure on the use of AI tools.
- Grading rubrics must distinguish between AI-assisted and unassisted student work.
- The University will establish an AI Working Group and provide technological resources and training to support implementation.
1. General Policy Statement 2. Premise 3. Purpose 4. Scope 5. Policy 6. Strategies for UG's Implementation of this Policy 7. Principles for the Establishment of Grading Rubric 8. Principles for Accommodating the Use of AI in Assignments 9. Reasonable Assumption 10. Managing Suspected Breaches of this Policy 11. Review Requirements 12. Effective Date Appendices
How it scores
Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.
Accountability
4/5Clear responsibility for AI outcomes
All errors in a student’s work whether it is AI generated, once it appears in a submitted assignment, will be ascribed to the student.
Section 5.2.1
screening score · 2026-10-23
Fairness
4/5Non-discrimination and equitable treatment
In light of the foregoing students with SEND shall also be allowed the use of required generative and assistive AI technologies
Section 5.2.3
screening score · 2026-10-23
Human Dignity
0/5Respect for the inherent worth of persons
screening score · 2026-10-23
Human Oversight
4/5Humans remain in control of consequential decisions
Where AI-generated text has been flagged in an assignment by a Lecturer, the student must be shown the report and given an opportunity to respond.
Section 5.1.4
screening score · 2026-10-23
Privacy
2/5Protection of personal data and private life
The deployment and utilization of AI tools are affected by barriers such as connectivity, privacy issues, biases, discrimination
Section 1.1
screening score · 2026-10-23
Transparency
4/5Openness about how AI systems work and are used
It must be explicitly stated in course outlines that students are required to provide full disclosure on the use of AI tools.
Section 5.1.3
screening score · 2026-10-23
Impact Assessment
2/5Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use
Even in view of the many benefits of AI, there are ethical and societal concerns about its use that cannot be ignored.
Section 1.1
screening score · 2026-10-23