AI Use in Assessment
DAIS-POL-023
AI Use in Assessment Policy
Data and AI School of London, NCFE Approved Centre
Policy Owner: Lead IQA / Compliance Manager
Version: 1.0 | Date: April 2026 | Review: April 2027 (or upon any NCFE/JCQ AI guidance update)
NCFE Risk Level: High
Mode of Delivery: Fully Online
23.1 Purpose and Scope
The Data and AI School of London occupies a distinctive position: it teaches Artificial Intelligence while operating in an environment where AI tools can be misused to undermine assessment integrity. This policy draws a clear and enforceable line between the legitimate use of AI as a curriculum tool and its misuse in NCFE qualification assessments.
This policy complies with JCQ and NCFE guidance on AI in assessment (from September 2025) and is aligned with the school's Malpractice and Plagiarism Policy (Policy 10).
23.2 The Core Distinction
AI as a learning tool: Learners are expected to understand, build, and use AI systems as part of their qualification. Use of AI tools in learning activities, laboratory exercises, and exploratory tasks is encouraged. AI as an assessment tool: Submission of AI-generated text, code, data analysis, reports, or other content as original assessed work, without explicit permission for that specific task, constitutes malpractice under Policy 10.
23.3 Task-Level AI Permission Framework
For every formally assessed task, the assessor specifies one of the following permission levels in the assessment brief, published on the VLE:
| Level | Label | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | No AI | No AI tools may be used at any stage. The work must be entirely the learner's own. |
| 1 | AI for research only | AI tools may be used to search for information or generate ideas. All submitted work must be written by the learner. |
| 2 | AI-assisted | AI tools may assist with drafting or coding. Use must be declared. Final work must be substantially the learner's own. |
| 3 | AI-integrated | The task specifically requires AI tools as part of the deliverable. Full use is expected and must be documented. |
Submitting work at a higher level of AI use than the stated permission level constitutes malpractice and will be investigated under Policy 10.
23.4 Declaration Requirement
For all assessed submissions at Level 0, 1, or 2, learners must include a completed AI Use Declaration confirming: whether AI tools were used and which; how they were used; and that the final submission is substantially their own work and that they understand and can explain all parts of it. Submissions without a completed declaration will be held pending clarification from the learner.
23.5 Detection and Investigation
Assessors are trained to identify indicators of AI-generated content, including:
Uncharacteristically polished or formal language inconsistent with the learner's previous writing style
Generic, non-contextualised content that does not reference the learner's own experience
Factual inaccuracies or "hallucinations" characteristic of large language model outputs
Code that is structurally correct but contains variable names or comments that do not reflect the learner's own work
Where AI misuse is suspected, the matter is referred to the Compliance Manager under Policy 10. The learner may be asked to undertake a viva voce via video call to confirm their understanding of the submitted work.
23.6 Consequences
A grade of Not Yet Competent (NYC) for the submitted unit
A requirement to resubmit under supervised conditions
Disqualification from the qualification
Referral to NCFE under JCQ Suspected Malpractice procedures
23.7 Policy Maintenance
This policy is reviewed immediately following any update to NCFE or JCQ guidance on AI in assessment. Where guidance changes materially, all currently enrolled learners are notified via the VLE and required to re-confirm their understanding before their next assessed submission.
This policy is reviewed annually. Next review: April 2027 (or upon any NCFE/JCQ AI guidance update). Approved by: Head of Centre. © Data and AI School of London, April 2026. NCFE Approved Centre.