Conditions and recommendations for the use of AI-based applications in teaching and assessment

Incorporating AI into teaching and learning can be useful and beneficial, especially with regard to developing a work culture and the correct way to handle these innovative technologies. For example, AI can be used as a tool, addressed as a subject of learning, or reflected upon in the context of the subject. Teachers design courses individually in terms of content and didactics to achieve specific competence goals. Accordingly, the teaching and learning objectives that are pursued in the context of the different courses are diverse. Whether or how the achievement of teaching and learning objectives is promoted or hindered by the use of AI-based applications must therefore be decided individually for each course by the respective teacher for the specific teaching context. For each subject and each course, it must be clarified how AI can be used as an aid and to what extent the possibilities of artificial intelligence are suitable as a learning object.

In teaching, only centrally provided AI tools that have been checked for data protection compliance may be used. The Academic Cloud (ChatAI) provides all Leuphana University members with access to several AI-based large language models (LLMs), including ChatGPT, that meet these criteria. Other AI tools and providers should not be used in teaching.

Information on didactic examples of use, good practices and the limitations of AI tools can be found on our website on AI events and links. You will also find an overview of regular external and internal training courses there.

Texts and other works (products) such as images, videos or music created by students as part of their studies are the products of a complex learning process and often the results of (initial) scientific work. The way in which learning processes are mastered and results are developed is subject to criteria of honesty and ethically correct action (see Rules of Good Scientific Practice at Leuphana).

The availability of AI has an impact on the design of examination requirements. It is recommended that examination requirements and tasks be designed in such a way that they can only be completed to a sufficient standard by the persons to be examined. This should reduce or, at best, avoid uncertainties and the need for clarification in examination procedures.

The principle for assessment performances is that they are to be performed by the person to be assessed independently and exclusively with the use of approved aids. The possibility of using AI tools must therefore be considered in connection with the required originality of the work performed. Whether and how AI-based applications may be included in this context depends, on the one hand, on the permissibility defined by the examiner and, on the other hand, on the type of use and - in accordance with good scientific practice - on the creation of transparency in their use. In summary, it is about ethically correct behaviour and taking responsibility for one's own learning process in the light of the assessment requirements.

Having one's own work - and especially work that is submitted for assessment - done exclusively or predominantly by others (humans or digital tools) violates these criteria and is therefore inadmissible. Accordingly, such an examination performance would be assessed as 'not sufficient' (5.0) and, in the case of an ungraded examination or study performance, as "not passed"" (e.g. RPO-BA §16, para. 4, sentence 1). At the same time, the use of new digital technologies in the sense of good academic practice combined with comprehensive acknowledgement in individual sub-processes and for feedback in manageable sub-tasks or in the discussion of individual aspects that contribute to the examination of content is conceivable in principle. In this way, new insights can be gained in the research and orientation phase or feedback on products can be used for revisions. Insofar as these refer to the editing and revision of one's own performance, this is to be regarded as a component of academic work and can contribute to its professionalisation.

Declaration of Originality

With the declaration of originality, authors of academic papers confirm that they have prepared them themselves - in accordance with the principles of good academic practice. The requirements for the declaration of originality, which students must enclose with the assessment, are defined in the Framework Examination Regulations (Rahmenprüfungsordnung, RPO) § 7, Paragraph 9:

In any written work [...] that is not written under supervision, all passages that are taken verbatim from publications or other sources must be given the necessary identification. The citation must be given in direct connection with the quotation. The citation must be given for the analogous transfer from publications or other sources. The written work must contain the signed declaration that the work - in the case of group work, the part of the work marked accordingly - has been written independently and that no sources or aids other than those indicated have been used, and all passages in the thesis which have been taken verbatim or in spirit from other sources have been marked as such.

The § 7 para. 9 (RPO) cited here also applies to the use of AI tools. Unlike traditional sources, for which standardised citation methods exist, it has not yet been uniformly clarified for AI applications how AI should be acknowledged. Instructions for documenting the use of the AI tool can be found below.

Further information on the declaration of autonomy can be found on the website of the writing centre.

As with other academic sources, the adoption of AI-generated content (e.g. texts, images, programming codes) is the responsibility of the respective user (student or teacher). The user must check and/or verify the quality independently and cannot blame the information source for possible errors in the content.

The assessment and evaluation of a performance must be carried out by teachers themselves. Examiners can make use of human and technical assistance in the assessment of performances, provided that the limits of assessment, copyright and data protection law are observed. It is important that examiners understand these preliminary corrections and finally assess the performance themselves and take responsibility for it.

Documentation of the use of AI tools

In principle, the use of AI tools should be documented. On the website, you will find decision-making aids for the use of various documentation tools. At the moment, there are no uniform regulations in the sense of standards for documentation and labelling. Teachers should therefore define this themselves. You can find suggestions and recommendations on our website.

Agreements on AI regulations

For the agreements that each teacher can make with students for the seminar, you will find three sample solutions on the website.

The Teaching Service is available to answer didactic questions regarding the use of AI in teaching and examinations. For administrative questions and questions regarding examination law related to the use of AI in examinations, please contact the relevant student service. In the event of conflicts and problems, please contact the ombudsperson for students and teachers. For further legal questions, please contact the legal office or the data protection officer (accessible via VPN).