Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

1. Preamble

Capital City University, Kano ("the University", "CCU") recognizes that Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies including generative AI, machine learning tools, and automated decision-support systems are rapidly reshaping teaching, learning, research, and administration worldwide. Used responsibly, AI can enhance educational quality, expand access, accelerate research, and improve institutional efficiency. Used carelessly or without appropriate safeguards, AI can compromise academic integrity, data privacy, equity, and the credibility of the University's qualifications.

This Policy sets out the principles, rules, and procedures that govern the acquisition, deployment, and use of AI technologies by staff, students, contractors, and affiliates of Capital City University, Kano. It applies alongside, and does not replace, existing University policies on academic integrity, data protection, research ethics, ICT acceptable use, and human resources conduct.

2. Purpose

The purpose of this Policy is to:

• Establish a clear, consistent institutional position on the responsible, ethical, and lawful use of AI at Capital City University, Kano.
• Protect the integrity of academic assessment, research, and credentialing processes from misuse or over-reliance on AI.
• Safeguard the privacy, data protection rights, and welfare of students, staff, and third parties whose information may be processed by AI systems.
• Promote equitable access to AI tools and AI literacy across the University community.
• Provide a governance structure for approving, monitoring, and reviewing AI tools and use cases.
• Position the University to responsibly harness AI's benefits for teaching, research, and administration while managing its risks.

3. Scope

This Policy applies to:

• All students enrolled in any programme of Capital City University, Kano (undergraduate, postgraduate, etc).
• All academic and non-academic staff, including full-time, part-time, adjunct, visiting, and contract staff.
• Contractors, vendors, consultants, and third-party partners who access University systems, data, or premises.
• All uses of AI technologies in connection with university activities, whether conducted on university-owned devices/systems or personal devices, and whether the AI tool is university-licensed or independently sourced.

This Policy covers generative AI (e.g., large language models, image and code generators), predictive analytics and machine learning tools, AI-enabled proctoring and plagiarism-detection tools, AI chatbots and virtual assistants, and any automated or algorithmic decision-support system used in University processes.

4. Definitions

Term	Definition
Artificial Intelligence (AI)	Computer systems capable of performing tasks that typically require human intelligence, including learning, reasoning, problem-solving, perception, and language generation.
Generative AI	AI systems that produce new text, images, audio, video, or code in response to prompts (e.g., ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, DALL-E).
Automated Decision-Making	A process in which a decision affecting a person is made solely or predominantly by an algorithm or AI system, without meaningful human judgement.
AI Literacy	The knowledge and skills needed to understand, critically evaluate, and effectively and ethically use AI tools.
Approved AI Tool	An AI application or platform that has been reviewed and authorized for institutional use by the AI Governance Committee and/or ICT Directorate.
Academic Work	Any assessed or credit-bearing output produced by a student or staff member, including assignments, theses, dissertations, examinations, laboratory reports, and research publications.
Personal Data	Any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person, as defined under the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023 (NDPA).
AI Governance Committee (AIGC)	The cross-functional University body established under Section 12 of this Policy to oversee AI adoption, risk, and compliance.

5. Guiding Principles

The university's approach to AI is anchored on the following principles:

5.1 Human Oversight and Accountability

AI shall support, not replace, human judgement in decisions affecting students, staff, and the university's academic standards. A qualified human being must remain accountable for any decision informed by AI, particularly in grading, admissions, discipline, and employment.

5.2 Academic Integrity

The use of AI must never compromise the honesty, originality, and rigour expected of academic work. Passing off AI-generated content as one's own original work, without permitted disclosure, constitutes academic misconduct.

5.3 Transparency and Disclosure

Staff and students must disclose the use of AI in academic work, research, and official university processes where required by this Policy, a course syllabus, examination rules, or a research ethics approval.

5.4 Equity and Access

The University will work to ensure that access to approved AI tools does not become a source of unfair advantage or disadvantage among students, and will provide guidance and, where feasible, institutional licences to reduce inequitable access.

5.5 Privacy and Data Protection

Use of AI must comply with the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023, and university data protection policies. Personal data of students, staff, or third parties shall not be entered into AI systems that are not approved for such use.

5.6 Security and Reliability

Only AI tools that meet the university's information security requirements may be used to process university data. Staff and students must be alert to AI-generated misinformation ("hallucinations") and verify AI outputs before relying on them.

5.7 Academic Freedom

Nothing in this Policy shall unduly restrict legitimate academic freedom in research and pedagogy; however, academic freedom does not extend to breaches of law, ethics, or academic integrity.

6. AI in Teaching and Learning

6.1 Lecturer Authority

Each course lecturer, in line with departmental and Faculty guidance, shall specify in the course syllabus the permitted extent of AI use for that course, using the following default categories unless a different scheme is approved by the Department:

• Level 0: No AI use permitted on any assessed work for the course.
• Level 1: AI may be used for idea generation, brainstorming, and study support only; final submitted work must be the student's own.
• Level 2: AI may be used to assist with drafting, editing, or coding, provided its use is disclosed and the student can explain and defend all submitted work.
• Level 3: AI use is expected and integral to the assessment (e.g., critique of AI output, AI-assisted research), subject to lecturer-specified conditions.

In the absence of an explicit statement in the syllabus or assessment brief, Level 1 shall apply by default.

6.2 Student Responsibilities

1. Students must read and comply with the AI use level specified for each course and assessment.
2. Where disclosure is required, students must clearly indicate which AI tools were used, for what purpose, and to what extent (e.g., in a footnote, appendix, or declaration).
3. Students remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and academic integrity of any work they submit, regardless of any AI assistance used.
4. Students must not use AI tools during examinations, tests, or other invigilated assessments unless expressly permitted by the examiner and University examination regulations.
5. Students should be aware that AI-generated content may be inaccurate, biased, or fabricated, and must independently verify any factual claims before relying on them.

6.3 Staff Responsibilities in Teaching

• Design assessments, where feasible, that are resilient to inappropriate AI use (e.g., oral defences, in-class components, process-based assessment, reflective components).
• Communicate AI use expectations clearly at the start of each course and within each assessment brief.
• Undertake University-provided AI literacy training to keep pace with evolving tools and detection challenges.
• Apply AI-detection tools, where used, as one indicator among several, exercising professional judgement rather than treating a detection score as conclusive proof of misconduct.

6.4 Academic Integrity and Misconduct

Unauthorized or undisclosed use of AI in assessed work, where prohibited or beyond the permitted level, shall be treated as an academic integrity violation under the University's Academic Integrity/Examination Misconduct Regulations, and may attract sanctions ranging from resubmission and mark deduction to suspension or expulsion, depending on severity and the outcome of due process.

Allegations of AI-related misconduct shall be investigated through the University's existing academic misconduct procedures, with the accused student or staff member afforded the right to be heard, to view the evidence relied upon, and to appeal, consistent with principles of fair hearing.

7. AI in Research

1. Researchers (staff and postgraduate students) may use AI tools to support literature review, data analysis, coding, and drafting, subject to disclosure in accordance with the standards of the relevant journal, funder, or the University's Research Ethics Committee (REC).
2. AI tools must not be listed as an author or co-author of any academic publication; responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of research outputs rests solely with the human researcher(s).
3. Any research involving AI-driven data analysis, participant profiling, or AI-generated synthetic data must be disclosed in the methodology and, where applicable, approved in advance by the Research Ethics Committee.
4. Personal or sensitive research data (including human subjects data) must not be uploaded to non-approved, non-institutional AI platforms.
5. Researchers must verify AI-assisted literature summaries and citations for accuracy, as AI tools are known to fabricate references ("citation hallucination").
6. Use of AI in grant applications, peer review, and research evaluation must comply with the specific rules of the funding body or journal, which take precedence where stricter than this Policy.

8. AI in Administration and Institutional Decision-Making

8.1 Permitted Administrative Uses

Subject to the risk-tiering in Section 9, AI tools may support administrative functions such as drafting correspondence, summarizing documents, scheduling, data analysis, Chabot for routine enquiries, and process automation.

8.2 Prohibition on Unreviewed Automated Decisions

AI shall not be used as the sole basis for decisions materially affecting an individual's admission, academic standing, discipline, employment, promotion, or termination. Any such decision must involve meaningful review by an authorized human decision-maker, who must be able to explain and justify the outcome.

8.3 Admissions and Assessment Screening

Where AI tools are used to assist in shortlisting applicants or screening assessments (e.g., essay scoring support), such use must be approved by the AI Governance Committee, subject to bias testing, and always subject to human review before any final decision.

8.4 Human Resources

AI tools used in recruitment screening, performance analytics, or staff monitoring must be approved by the Human Resources Directorate and the AI Governance Committee, and staff must be notified of any such use in accordance with applicable labour and data protection law.

9. Risk Classification and Approval Levels

To calibrate oversight proportionately, AI use cases at the University are classified into four risk tiers:

Risk Tier	Examples of Use	Approval Required	Oversight
Tier 1 - Low Risk	Grammar/style checking, brainstorming, drafting personal study notes, summarizing publicly available material for personal understanding.	None; disclose if Lecturer requires it.	Self-managed; spot-checked via academic integrity processes.
Tier 2 - Moderate Risk	AI-assisted literature searches, coding assistance, drafting official correspondence, generating first drafts of reports or slides.	Supervisor/Lecturer awareness; unit-level guidance followed.	Departmental AI Champion; periodic review.
Tier 3 - High Risk	Use in assessment, screening, grading or admissions research data analysis, generation of content published under the University's name.	Written approval from Head of Unit and, where applicable, the AI Governance Committee.	AI Governance Committee; documented human review of every output.
Tier 4 - Prohibited / Restricted	Automated decisions affecting a person's academic or employment status without human review; processing of sensitive personal data through non-approved tools; use that violates examination rules or Nigerian law.	Not permitted, or requires Vice-Chancellor and Governance Committee approval plus a Data Protection Impact Assessment.	AI Governance Committee and Registry; mandatory incident reporting.

Units proposing a new AI use case must consult the ICT Directorate and, where the use falls within Tier 3 or 4, submit a request to the AI Governance Committee before deployment.

10. Data Protection, Privacy, and Security

1. All use of AI involving personal data must comply with the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023, the University's Data Protection Policy, and any sector-specific regulations (e.g., National Universities Commission guidelines).
2. Staff and students must not input confidential University information, unpublished research data, personally identifiable student/staff records, examination content, or proprietary University materials into public or non-approved AI tools.
3. Only AI tools listed as "Approved" by the ICT Directorate may be used to process University data classified as confidential or Restricted under the University's Data Classification Policy.
4. Where an AI tool involves processing of personal data at scale or of a sensitive nature, a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) must be completed and approved before deployment.
5. Vendors and third-party AI providers must be subject to due diligence, data processing agreements, and security review by the ICT Directorate prior to institutional adoption.
6. Any suspected data breach involving an AI system must be reported immediately to the ICT Directorate and the Data Protection Officer, in line with the University's Data Breach Response Procedure.

11. Equity, Accessibility, and AI Literacy

The University is committed to ensuring that the adoption of AI does not widen existing inequalities among students or staff.

• The University will, where resources permit, provide institutional access or subsidised licences to approved AI tools to reduce disparities arising from unequal ability to pay for premium AI services.
• AI literacy training will be incorporated into student orientation, staff induction, and continuing professional development programmes.
• Course materials and assessment design should accommodate students with limited or unstable internet access and should not assume universal access to paid AI tools.
• Reasonable accommodations for AI-assisted tools used for disability support (e.g., speech-to-text, screen readers) shall continue to be provided in line with the University's disability support policy and are distinct from, and not restricted by, this Policy's assessment-related AI rules unless the accommodation itself involves content generation covered under Section 6.

12. Governance and Oversight

12.1 AI Governance Committee (AIGC)

The University shall establish an AI Governance Committee, reporting to the Vice-Chancellor, comprising representation from the Registry, ICT Directorate, Faculty deans or nominees, the Research Ethics Committee, the Data Protection Officer, Legal Services, Human Resources, Student Affairs, and student representative(s).

The AIGC shall be responsible for:

• Reviewing and approving AI tools for institutional use and maintaining an Approved AI Tools List.
• Reviewing Tier 3 and Tier 4 use case proposals and DPIAs.
• Monitoring emerging AI risks, regulatory developments, and sector guidance (including National Universities Commission and NITDA guidance).
• Recommending updates to this Policy and related procedures to Senate and Management Board.
• Receiving and reviewing incident reports related to AI misuse or failure.
• Publishing periodic reports on AI adoption and compliance across the University.

12.2 Departmental AI Champions

Each Faculty/Department shall designate an AI Champion to advise staff and students on appropriate AI use, cascade AIGC guidance, and act as a first point of contact for AI-related queries within the unit.

12.3 ICT Directorate

The ICT Directorate shall maintain technical security review procedures for AI tools, manage institutional AI licences, and provide a public Approved AI Tools List accessible to all staff and students via the University portal.

13. Roles and Responsibilities

Role	Responsibility
Vice-Chancellor/Management	Ultimate accountability for AI strategy and compliance; approves Tier 4 use cases.
AI Governance Committee	Approves AI tools and high-risk use cases; monitors compliance; recommends policy updates.
Deans/Heads of Department	Ensure Policy is communicated and applied within their units; approve Tier 2/3 use cases at unit level.
Course Lecturers	Set and communicate AI use levels per course/assessment; design integrity-resilient assessments.
ICT Directorate	Technical review, security vetting, and licensing of AI tools; maintains Approved AI Tools List.
Data Protection Officer	Reviews DPIAs; oversees compliance with the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023.
Research Ethics Committee	Reviews AI use in research involving human subjects or sensitive data.
All Staff and Students	Comply with this Policy; disclose AI use as required; report concerns or suspected misuse.

14. Compliance, Monitoring, and Enforcement

1. Breaches of this Policy by students shall be handled under the University's Student Disciplinary Regulations and Academic Integrity Regulations, as applicable.
2. Breaches by staff shall be handled under the University's Staff Disciplinary Procedures and, where relevant, contractual terms for third parties.
3. The AIGC shall conduct periodic compliance reviews and may request units to demonstrate adherence to approved-tool and data protection requirements.
4. Staff and students are encouraged to report suspected misuse of AI, or concerns about an AI tool's fairness, accuracy, or security, to their Departmental AI Champion or directly to the AIGC secretariat, including confidentially where appropriate.
5. Retaliation against any person for making a good-faith report under this Policy is prohibited and shall itself be treated as misconduct.

15. Policy Review

Given the pace of change in AI technology, this Policy shall be formally reviewed by the AI Governance Committee at least once every twelve (12) months, or earlier where significant regulatory, technological, or institutional developments warrant. Proposed amendments shall be submitted to Senate and Management Board for approval.

16. Related Policies and Reference Instruments

• Capital City University Academic Integrity / Examination Misconduct Regulations
• Capital City University ICT Acceptable Use Policy
• Capital City University Data Protection Policy
• Capital City University Research Ethics Policy
• Capital City University Staff Disciplinary Procedures and Code of Conduct
• Capital City University Student Disciplinary Regulations
• Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023
• National Universities Commission (NUC) guidance on the use of AI in Nigerian universities (as issued from time to time)
• National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA) guidelines on AI and data protection

17. Approval and Authority

This Policy is issued under the authority of the Vice-Chancellor and becomes effective upon approval by the Senate and Management of Capital City University, Kano. It shall be published on the University portal and communicated to all staff and students upon adoption.

---

Appendix A: Student Disclosure Statement Template

Suggested wording for students required to disclose AI use in an assignment:

"I acknowledge the use of [name of AI tool(s)] in the preparation of this work, specifically for [describe purpose, e.g., grammar checking, brainstorming, code debugging]. I confirm that the analysis, arguments, and conclusions presented are my own, and that I have verified the accuracy of any AI-assisted content."

Appendix B: Quick Reference - What Students May and May Not Do

Generally Permitted (unless a Lecturer states otherwise)

• Using AI to brainstorm topics or outline structure.
• Using AI as a grammar and style checker.
• Using AI to explain a difficult concept for personal understanding.

Requires Disclosure

• Using AI to draft substantial portions of text later edited by the student.
• Using AI to assist with code, data analysis, or translation submitted for assessment.

Generally Prohibited (unless explicitly authorised)

• Submitting AI-generated text, code, or analysis as one's own unaided work.
• Using AI during closed-book examinations or invigilated tests.
• Uploading confidential, personal, or examination material to public AI tools.