Day 4: Voting Round 1

Indicate below to what extent you agree or disagree with a proposed rule. Judge each rule by the merit of its content. Don't treat rules as if they are in competition: if rule X substantively resembles rule Y, and you agree with the substance of both rules but prefer rule Y's wording, don't award X a negative score.

1.Students should be allowed to opt-out of non-licensed AI use in any assessment products—both their own and the teacher’s—for ethical reasons, without penalty.

2. Students must have the right to decide whether to use GenAI, as long as its use complies with course learning objectives and rules (academic integrity)

3. Students must not be forced to use Gen AI.

4. At the start of a course, teachers must provide students with specific, clear AI usage rules for assignments in that course, based on intended learning outcomes.

5. Lecturers should make explicit in their syllabus how they assess the potential unauthorised use of GenAI in students’ assignments

6. The teacher must clearly state if and how the use of GenAI is allowed in the assessment.

7. Teachers must specify in all assessment instructions if, and how, the use of Gen AI is permitted.

8. The teacher must clearly state if the use of AI is required to complete the course in the study guide/prospectus. (before start course)

9. Lecturers should explicitly include in the learning objectives of the course the mandatory use of GenAI in the assignments on e-prospectus

10. At the start of every course, students and teachers should discuss together the intersection between learning objectives, assessment methods, and role GenAI

11. If the use of Gen AI is not permitted, teachers must clarify the consequences of such use.

12. The faculty should provide a standardized format for AI disclosure--including both the kind of use as well as the rationale for it

13. Students should make explicit in their assignments which specific GenAI tools, models, and platforms they used for their assignment

14. All use of GenAI in assessments by students and teachers must be disclosed

15. AI use disclosure must include how GenAI was used (structure, grammar, etc.), which model was used and what, if any, verification…

16. When examiners use GenAI for grading purposes, they should always disclose how they used it

17. Students and instructors should include a statement on the use of AI in their assignment and assessment documents

18. In assessments where Gen AI use is permitted, students must disclose how Gen AI was used.

19. Teachers may use Gen AI in grading where feasible but must disclose such use at the beginning of the course.

20. Course coordinators should provide a GenAI statement, that describes where and in what ways has GenAI been used in preparation of course materials

21. AI-detectors should not be used as an assessment tool/aid.

22. Teachers should design assessments that can be completed successfully without the use of GenAI, unless the learning objective is specifically related to (licensed) GenAI

23. Lecturers should include at least 30% of the total grade that is AI-unfriendly (close environment assignments) in their courses, unless it’s a course that develops GenAI skills

24. A course grade should be based on at least one AI-proof assessment method.

25. Examiners should design obligatory assessment "checkpoints" that evaluate if the students can perform the transferrable skills targeted by the study program without the use of GenAI

26. When calculating the workload in EC for a given course, course coordinators should calculate workload estimations based on the assumption that students will not make use of GenAI tools to complete the expected output, unless GenAI is required by the course coordinator.

27. Teachers must ensure each assessment is in line with the learning goals of that course or the degree irrespective of the GenAI usage

28. The amount of writing instructions and assignments may be reduced only when there is a justifiable realignment with the learning objectives, and not due to concerns of GenAI use.

29. The University should provide a list of approved Generative AI services for students to use when allowed to use AI.

30. The University should provide a list of approved Generative AI services for staff to use when allowed to use AI.

31. Any University-approved Generative AI tool must adhere to ethical standards around legally sourced training data, transparency etc.

32. Any University-endorsed Generative AI tool must adhere to the legal standards of the GDPR, et cetera.

33. If GenAI-tool usage is prescribed/demanded by Leiden University, access to said tool should be provided by Leiden University.

34. The University must consider the Generative AI model’s sustainability standards when deciding which Generative AI tool to approve.

35. Programs should defer the permission of the usage of Generative AI until students have acquired the prerequisite academic skills in the program without the use of Generative AI.

36. Sensitive information (e.g. medical info/personally identifying information/etc) should not be shared with external AI tools.

37. Any data part of an assessment must not be shared with external parties, including providers of GenAI, without consent of respective author.

38. Both teachers and students should always request permission before submitting the work of a (fellow) student to non-licensed GenAI.

39. Examiners should always be responsible and remain accountable for the content of their evaluations

40. Individual group member of a group assignment should always remain accountable for their individual parts when students have different views of GenAI use

41. In principle, students bear joint responsibility for the use of Gen AI in group work, but in case problems arise, the teacher may apply discretion in assessing each group member.

42. In group work, students must bear joint responsibility for the use of Gen AI in preparing the assignment.

43. The teacher must carry the final responsibility and accountability over the methods and content of an assessment.

44. The teacher must carry the final responsibility and accountability over feedback or grading on an assessment.

45. The teacher must always be able to explain how they came to the format of assessment and feedback on assessments.

46. The student must always be able to explain how they came to their answer and argue the answer.

47. Lecturers should facilitate open and respectful discussions among group members when there are different opinions about GenAI among students

48. There should be a faculty-specific counsellor whose function is to promote AI literacy, and mediate discussions around Gen AI use and assessments

49. When GenAI is used to generate questions and/or answer models, the output of the model should be reviewed and approved by at least two human assessors.

50. If GenAI use in assessment is allowed at a faculty, learning about the risks and best practices of GenAI use should be included in the program as a mandatory course

51. Study programmes should implement measures to increase AI literacy and more responsible usage of AI among students.

52. Use of GenAI and its potential impacts must be disclosed and addressed alongside ethics considerations in assessments concerning internships, thesis, and field research.