teaching
Mines guidance expects faculty to state course GenAI expectations explicitly and in writing, including permitted and prohibited uses, and encourages instructors to design assignments that reduce unethical GenAI use.
Review: Agent reviewed
Change log
Colorado School of Mines
Source-backed change history with no release-to-release policy diff rows recorded yet; current claims, official sources, review state, and freshness remain visible across 0 public release records.
Change summary
Current public record freshness and review state.
Colorado School of Mines currently has 4 source-backed claim records and 1 official source attribution. Latest tracked changed date: May 17, 2026. No tracker diff rows are recorded in the latest public release.
This page combines all public release diffs for Colorado School of Mines. Individual release snapshots remain available from their release-specific URLs.
No release-to-release policy diff rows are recorded for this university yet. The page still tracks current source-backed claims, official source attributions, review state, source freshness, and public JSON for discovery and citation.
This tracker is not legal advice, not academic integrity advice, and not an official university statement unless a linked source is the university's own official page.
Newly extracted claims are tracker additions and are not necessarily newly published by the university. Source snapshot changes show hash changes for the same source URL and are not by themselves policy changes.
Diff categories
Semantic classification for this release diff.
Combined release diff
Unified tracker diff generated from all public release snapshots for this university.
Colorado School of Mines combined release diff
Initial tracked release. Lines represent public claim/evidence records entering the release snapshot.
+8-0
11 # Colorado School of Mines AI policy record
2+ai_tool_treatment: In the absence of contrary written instructor directions, Mines guidance says students may not submit evaluation work generated in whole or in part by GenAI, while GenAI use for learning, studying, proofreading, and brainstorming is permitted and encouraged unless instructors state otherwise.
3+Evidence (en, c37960e55089): Unless instructors provide explicit permission or instruction to the contrary, students may not submit content for evaluation that was generated, in whole or in part, by genAI tools. Using genAI tools when unauthorized would be considered a potential violation of Mines' policy on academic integrity.
4+academic_integrity: Mines sample syllabus language says students who include AI-generated ideas, text, code, or images in submitted work must document and credit the source, and that failure to properly cite AI tools would be considered academic misconduct.
5+Evidence (en, c37960e55089): If you include content (e.g., ideas, text, code, images) that was generated, in whole or in part, by Generative Artificial Intelligence tools (including, but not limited to, ChatGPT and other large language models) in work submitted for evaluation in this course, you must document and credit your source.
6+source_status: Colorado School of Mines Academic Affairs maintains official generative-AI guidance, but the page frames the material as guidelines rather than a universal policy prescribing when GenAI must be allowed or disallowed.
7+Evidence (en, c37960e55089): While the intent of this resource is not to prescribe universal policies of when to allow or disallow generative AI, the text below provides some guidelines for the use of genAI in connection with academic work at the University.
8+teaching: Mines guidance expects faculty to state course GenAI expectations explicitly and in writing, including permitted and prohibited uses, and encourages instructors to design assignments that reduce unethical GenAI use.
9+Evidence (en, c37960e55089): Faculty are expected to state explicitly and affirmatively their expectations regarding student use of genAI tools. Instructors should specify in writing the permitted and prohibited uses of genAI tools in their courses, and should seek to clarify any expectations if they differ from one assessment to another.
Release history
0 public release diffs
Claim changes
4 claim records
academic_integrity
Mines sample syllabus language says students who include AI-generated ideas, text, code, or images in submitted work must document and credit the source, and that failure to properly cite AI tools would be considered academic misconduct.
Review: Agent reviewed
ai_tool_treatment
In the absence of contrary written instructor directions, Mines guidance says students may not submit evaluation work generated in whole or in part by GenAI, while GenAI use for learning, studying, proofreading, and brainstorming is permitted and encouraged unless instructors state otherwise.
Review: Agent reviewed
source_status
Colorado School of Mines Academic Affairs maintains official generative-AI guidance, but the page frames the material as guidelines rather than a universal policy prescribing when GenAI must be allowed or disallowed.
Review: Agent reviewed
Source snapshots
1 source attribution
Guidelines for Using Generative Artificial Intelligence at Mines
official_guidance Tracker checked at May 16, 2026, 11:51 PM