Academic Policies
Updated: 5 September 2026 · Version 1.0
Draft for review by the programme director. The documented completion requirements below are distinguished from the newly proposed rules.
Documented completion requirements
The two-year programme leads to Thomasianum’s ecclesial Absolutorium. The supplied study documents require regular active participation, a positively assessed supervised final paper of at least 30 pages meeting academic standards, and a passed Colloquium before the teaching faculty. This does not represent state accreditation or an academic degree. Practical pastoral training at the P.-Wolfgang-Kunicki-Akademie is separate.
Proposed: independent work
Submit your own work. Mark direct quotations and acknowledge ideas expressed in your own words. Fabricated sources, data or experiences, unauthorised collaboration, submitting another person’s work and unapproved duplicate submissions are incompatible with academic integrity. Learning together is encouraged; jointly produced assessed work requires explicit permission.
Proposed: responsible use of AI
Follow the AI rule explicitly supplied for each assessment. Where no rule is given, obtain written clarification before using generative AI. AI must not replace your own theological judgement or conceal another author’s contribution. Where permitted, identify the tool, purpose and extent of use and explain what you checked and revised yourself. Verify quotations and references against original sources; AI output is not evidence that a source exists. Do not upload personal data, confidential pastoral information or protected assessment materials to external AI services.
Proposed: transparent and fair assessment
The brief, criteria, permitted aids, deadlines and rules for resits or late work should be communicated in advance. Discuss barriers or additional needs privately with the programme director early. Suspected misconduct should be examined using specific evidence, with an opportunity for the person concerned to respond. An AI detector score alone should not establish misconduct. Decisions should include reasons and allow review. Responsibilities, deadlines and possible outcomes still require approval by the programme director.