Codes of conduct, ethical principles, human oversight requirements and responsible use guidance.
The same domain takes different forms at each level. The three readings below give its micro, meso and macro counterparts separately.
Respondents across all groups report stating where and for what purpose generative tools were used, citing them where the work is academic, and reviewing generated content thoroughly before it reaches anyone else. Disclosure is expressed as a description of purpose rather than as an acknowledgement of a tool.
Students may use generative AI to support their learning and, unless instructed otherwise, in assessment preparation, provided the use is acknowledged. The policy pairs permission with three prohibitions covering confidential information, personal data and copyrighted assessment content, and warns that over-reliance may hinder skill development.
A library guide published in May 2025 proposes structures for making the use of AI tools transparent: which tools were used, for what purpose and to what extent. A related journal policy states that authorship cannot be attributed to AI, that its use is confined to improving language or readability, that it must be cited, and that authors remain responsible for the validity of what it generates.
The Council of Higher Education published an ethical guide covering the use of generative AI in scientific research and publication in higher education institutions in May 2024. The partner reports that the guidance is advisory, which leaves each university to convert it into binding institutional rules.
Principles established in September 2024 were circulated to all public institutions, universities included. The instrument reaches higher education not through education policy but through public administration law, which is a distinct route into the sector.