AI Guidelines - on How to Handle AI in Teaching and Learning at Rhine-Waal University of Applied Sciences - Orientation for Teaching Staff

Aug 29, 2026

Uploaded by Mason

Guidelines for teaching staff at Rhine-Waal University of Applied Sciences on handling the impact and potential of artificial intelligence, especially generative AI such as ChatGPT, in teaching and learning, with emphasis on performance diagnostics and examinations. The document rejects blanket bans as imprudent and unenforceable and instead promotes responsible, transparent use. It sets requirements for module-specific permissions, individual disclosure of AI assistance, and education on ethical, legal, and privacy issues, supported by ongoing institutional discourse and research engagement.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages5

Reading Time13 min

AccessFree to download

Transparent use of AI in every module

Individual disclosure of AI use

Responsible use of AI

Strategic discourse at HSRW

Annex: Text blocks for communicating module-specific requirements to students

Clear rules on AI usage

Disclosure

Guidelines on How to Handle AI in Teaching and Learning at Rhine-Waal University of Applied Sciences These guidelines are intended to serve as an orientation for teaching staff at our university in dealing with the impact and potential of artificial intelligence (above all generative AI such as ChatGPT) in teaching and learning in general, and performance diagnostics and examination practices in particular. It is an important document not only due to a growing sense of unease regarding AI and its potential to produce more discriminatory outcomesin teaching, but also because of the rapid evolution of the technology itself. Experts widely agree that an outright ban or the otherwise strict regulation of AI usage at universities is neither prudent nor enforceable (refer to the legal assessment by Salden and Leschke, 2023) . Rather, teaching and assessment formats should be adjusted to allow for the responsible use of AI tools, enhancing the process of competence development as a result. Our approach to AI at Rhine-Waal University of Applied Sciences thus focuses less on sanctions , and more on the careful and well-informed consideration of the risks and opportunities of this emerging technology. 1. Transparent use of AI in every module At the start of a new semester, every teacher should clarify for their module(s) which AI tools are permitted, recommended or even required for which purpose, and how students should document their use of these tools. This requirement does not restrict teachers’ academic freedom.1 2. Individual disclosure of AI use While using AI-generated content is generally not considered an act of plagiarism, it could potentially constitute a violation of academic integrity. When used for take-home assignments, projects, a final thesis etc. , AI always counts as an ‘aid’, which is why students are required to clearly document and disclose which AI tools they used for which purpose, how their results were generated and processed (e.g. with a list of prompts in the annex), and where in their work these AI-derived results were used/integrated. Despite these disclosure requirements, however, it will likely become more difficult in the future to prove suspected misconduct in examination settings and above all separate a student’s own work from AI-generated work toa sufficient legal standard. Automated detection tools, e.g. GPTZero and TurnItIn, do not provide sufficient evidence of misconduct. 3. Responsible use of AI Beyond the need for reflection, transparency and clear communication (see above) of teaching contents, curricula, didactic methods and assessment diagnostics in individual modules and degree programmes, there are a number of unresolved issues with AI use in general, including ethical, budgetary, liability, copyright and data privacy considerations. The ecological footprint of AI computing should be discussed as well. Teaching staff should consider educating their students about these issues as part of the responsible use of AI tools. 4. Strategic discourse at HSRW Rhine-Waal University of Applied Sciences has established a research focus professorship in each of the faculties as well as a coordinating position in ZfQ to study and gain hands-on experience with AI in teaching contexts starting in summer semester 2025. All teachers are encouraged to connect with these professors and ZfQ and share their own thoughts and experiences.2 In addition, these guidelines should be discussed periodically in student committees (FSRs, AStA etc. ) and among teachers (faculty councils , Lehrcafé etc. ) to ensure they remain up to date, particularly given the rapid nature of progress in AI technology. Weare also currently testing and discussing ways to grant access to AI tools for all members of the university, but without violating data privacy laws. Developed by the “AI Working Group” of the Commission for Teaching, Learning and Continuing Training together with other members of the universi

FAQs

Why does the document avoid banning AI outright at the university?

It argues that a full ban or overly strict regulation is neither prudent nor enforceable. Instead, teaching and assessment formats should be adjusted to enable responsible AI use.

What must teachers communicate to students at the start of a semester?

Teachers should clarify which AI tools are permitted, recommended, or required for each module purpose, and how students must document their use.

How should students disclose AI-generated content for take-home work or theses?

AI use should be documented and disclosed, including which tools were used, for what purposes, how results were generated and processed (e.g., prompt lists in an annex), and where AI-derived results were integrated.

Aug 29, 2026

Uploaded by Mason