Record history
Updates to this site's reviewed record, not confirmation that the university changed its policy.
Matching revisions: 9
Some records have no verified date. See the full history.
Page update
Revision: v6-reading-rankings-ten-20261027Comparable old and new text is unavailable.
Shared V6 reading layout and evidence presentation updated. University policy Claims, original evidence, held decisions and snapshot approvals remain unchanged; the institution audit remains PARTIAL.
Record maintenance
Revision: qs20-24-v6-r7-20261020Comparable old and new text is unavailable.
Records involved: 1 (1 corrected / adjusted)
Revision: qs20-24-v6-r6-20261020Records involved: 1 (1 corrected / adjusted)
Academic integrity
Under GSAS Committee on Regulations and Discipline procedures, students are asked to respond in writing to an allegation. Written statements are ordinarily due to the secretary two weeks after the student receives notification of the charge. The statement should admit or deny the allegations, including admission of some allegations and denial of others where applicable.
Under GSAS Committee on Regulations and Discipline procedures, students are asked to respond in writing to an allegation ordinarily within two weeks. Hearings are conducted by a panel of at least four members (including a usually non-voting secretary; three voting members including at least one student form a quorum). Decisions are made by secret ballot on a preponderance of the evidence; the committee recommends a sanction to the dean, who determines the penalty. Disciplinary decisions take immediate effect. Students may submit a written appeal to the Committee of Review no later than five business days after the committee decision. The Committee of Review (three members) may decline action or request reconsideration; on reconsideration, the committee cannot find culpability if previously exonerated or impose a more severe penalty. Scope is restricted to GSAS; research misconduct is referred under Research Misconduct procedures; undergraduate cases follow separate Yale College Executive Committee procedures.
Records involved: 1 (1 unnumbered records)
Revision: qs20-24-v6-r4-20261020Records involved: 1 (1 unnumbered records)
Academic integrity
Comparable old and new text is unavailable.
Under GSAS Committee on Regulations and Discipline procedures, students are asked to respond in writing to an allegation ordinarily within two weeks. Hearings are conducted by a panel of at least four members (including a usually non-voting secretary; three voting members including at least one student form a quorum). Decisions are made by secret ballot on a preponderance of the evidence; the committee recommends a sanction to the dean, who determines the penalty. Disciplinary decisions take immediate effect. Students may submit a written appeal to the Committee of Review no later than five business days after the committee decision. The Committee of Review (three members) may decline action or request reconsideration; on reconsideration, the committee cannot find culpability if previously exonerated or impose a more severe penalty. Scope is restricted to GSAS; research misconduct is referred under Research Misconduct procedures; undergraduate cases follow separate Yale College Executive Committee procedures.
Records involved: 1 (1 unnumbered records)
Revision: qs20-24-v6-r3-20261020Records involved: 1 (1 unnumbered records)
Academic integrity
Comparable old and new text is unavailable.
Under GSAS Committee on Regulations and Discipline procedures, students are asked to respond in writing to an allegation ordinarily within two weeks. Hearings are conducted by a panel of at least four members (including a usually non-voting secretary; three voting members including at least one student form a quorum). Decisions are made by secret ballot on a preponderance of the evidence; the committee recommends a sanction to the dean, who determines the penalty. Disciplinary decisions take immediate effect. Students may submit a written appeal to the Committee of Review no later than five business days after the committee decision. The Committee of Review (three members) may decline action or request reconsideration; on reconsideration, the committee cannot find culpability if previously exonerated or impose a more severe penalty. Scope is restricted to GSAS; research misconduct is referred under Research Misconduct procedures; undergraduate cases follow separate Yale College Executive Committee procedures.
Records involved: 6 (2 corrected / adjusted · 4 added)
Revision: qs20-22-v6-r1-20261018Records involved: 6 (2 corrected / adjusted · 4 added)
Approved tools · Coursework · 5 more topics
Under the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences (GSAS) 2026–2027 Personal Conduct and Academic Integrity Standards, inserting AI-generated text into an assignment without proper attribution is a violation of academic integrity standards, and using AI tools in a manner not authorized by faculty may also constitute a breach. Permissibility of AI writing tools varies from course to course and across research settings; graduate students are responsible for consulting relevant faculty members before using AI tools for coursework or research.
Under GSAS 2026–2027 standards, graduate students have the responsibility to be able to articulate explicitly the process by which they conduct research and draft work, including the ability to provide a draft history of submitted work demonstrating original thought and composition. In evaluating disciplinary allegations involving inappropriate use of AI tools, the absence of this material or an inability to articulate clearly the research and writing process may be taken into account.
Yale guidance says confidential, legally restricted, moderate-risk, and high-risk Yale data should not be entered into AI tools.
Yale's September2023 Provost guidance says not to enter confidential, legally restricted, moderate-risk or high-risk Yale data into an AI tool. The current institutional directory separately lists Clarity for High-risk data with a special ePHI environment and DUA restrictions, while Radiate web search is listed for Low-risk data. It lists Copilot Chat Web as Moderate and Work as High, Gemini and NotebookLM as Moderate, and Claude Enterprise as High with a special ePHI environment. These platform classifications must be read with each service's access restrictions and applicable data agreements; they do not resolve authorization for every dataset.
Zoom AI Companion is listed for Yale University in an official university AI tools source. Derived availability: allowed. Derived endorsement type: officially endorsed.
Yale's AI tools directory lists Zoom AI Companion for students, staff and faculty, free with a Zoom account and enabled by default for account holders. The Zoom AI Companion row lists the data classification level as High.
Yale Library guidance says licensed resources generally may not be used with AI because of copyright and vendor licensing agreements. Users should check the specific resource licence; the guide directs licence questions to the License Review Steering Committee and copyright questions to the Yale Copyright Librarian. The captured guide shows Last Updated September9,2026.
Under GSAS Committee on Regulations and Discipline procedures, students are asked to respond in writing to an allegation. Written statements are ordinarily due to the secretary two weeks after the student receives notification of the charge. The statement should admit or deny the allegations, including admission of some allegations and denial of others where applicable.
