Since its release in November 2022, ChatGPT has rapidly opened up access to generative artificial intelligence (AI), i.e. a new generation of computing tools capable of apeing certain aspects of human intelligence (expression, learning, reasoning, problem-solving, output creation...). All sectors of society are questioning the potential and the grey areas. The university is no exception. The present charter, by setting out a precise framework for the use of AI in the academic context (courses, assignments, exams, reports and other learning), shows you the boundary between what is permitted or desirable and what is not. Reflecting the current state of technology and usage (December 23), it will be enriched by information provided by teachers, departments, faculties... So keep an eye on these developments, which have a direct impact on your work as a student.
ULiège supports and develops thoughtful, responsible, critical and transparent use of AI among its students, to make the most of this powerful auxiliary.
Thoughtful, responsible use of AI
You are responsible for the academic work you present, and therefore for the use you make of AI in it. This means distinguishing between permitted and prohibited uses.
Permitted uses
With the exception of teacher instructions to the contrary, and the proscribed uses explained below, you may use artificial intelligence freely and without special mention in your work when it plays the role of :
- as a linguistic assistant: this involves improving (formulation, formatting, translation, etc.) the texts you have written. It is comparable to existing spelling and grammar checkers.
- as an information search assistant: this is similar to the use of existing search engines that facilitate access to knowledge on a subject.
It goes without saying that your university will encourage you to use AI in your personal life, to support your studies and consolidate your mastery of subjects!
Prohibited uses
It is forbidden to present the production of an AI (text, image, code, music...) as your own or that of a fellow student:
- you are dishonestly appropriating the work of others or ignoring the true sources that led to the result presented. Indeed, if AI generates an "original" production, it does so on the basis of resources whose authors the student has a duty to identify and cite. Any external contribution to personal academic work must be duly acknowledged by providing bibliographic references pointing to these primary sources.
- you're developing a form of intellectual laziness, since you're delegating to the machine a task which is your responsibility and part of your training. This is tantamount to depriving yourself of a learning opportunity.
- you prevent the teacher from properly assessing the knowledge, skills and attitudes that the work is supposed to reflect. Having an AI paraphrase texts written by others is plagiarism. This practice obscures your true contribution to the work and represents an attempt at concealment.
Students who are tempted to entrust ChatGPT or other AIs with the task of producing all or part of their personal work are liable to sanctions. The teacher's experience gives him/her the intuition to detect fraud. Possibly backed up by AI detectors, he or she may have presumptive evidence of a breach of academic honesty. He also reserves the right to ask for an explanation of how certain parts of an assignment came into being, to organize a supplementary verification test, an oral exam... If you are unsure about the rules for using AI in an assignment, we strongly advise you to ask your teachers.
Critical use of AI
The output of an artificial intelligence may appear plausible, but it may deviate from the original sources and contain significant errors of fact or interpretation. AI can say stupid things with aplomb! As those responsible for the quality of the information, ideas and analyses provided in your work, it's your responsibility to check, cross-check, supplement, source - in short, to apply your critical mind to the AI's productions as an academic does to any material he or she consults. This discernment is really just a new variation on a principle inherent to intellectual life. What's more, insofar as AI shuffles available data without any real verification of their validity, its productions can convey stereotypes and cognitive biases. The use of generative AI should always be followed by a phase of independent analysis.
Transparent use of AI
The teacher should be able to identify your share of any work submitted. You should therefore be able to account for this in a transparent manner. If an assignment includes responses from an AI (text, image, code, etc.), it should be referenced in accordance with current bibliographic standards. In addition to this explicit reference to the AI, the teacher could accentuate the requirement for transparency by asking you to detail, in the "Method" section of an assignment, an appendix or a separate document, how and why an AI has been exploited. Keeping a record of your interaction with the AI could be useful in this case. Here too, if you are unsure about the extent of your duty of transparency, consult your teacher, promoter, jury president, etc
Using AI to outdo itself
Careless use of AI can undermine your learning. It can also intensify it, and it's a good idea, as you progress through university, to practice using these new tools, while respecting the above principles and your teachers' specific instructions. However, your work is expected to surpass AI in terms of argumentation, justification, precision, discussion and critical analysis. Complete and correct referencing of sources, creative and innovative contributions, nuanced reflection, in-depth mastery of major intellectual operations, clarification of choices and positions, application to concrete problems, linkage to a social context: everything that makes a personal work of quality remains indisputably human and the only bearer of lasting learning.
If you have any further questions concerning the use of artificial intelligence tools, please do not hesitate to contact your teacher or the promoter of your work.
updated on 12/22/23
