University AI Policy Tracker

Registros abiertos y basados en evidencia sobre politicas universitarias de IA.

APIGitHub
Idioma
ENZHFRPL

Change log

The Ohio State University

Release-to-release tracker diff history with separate policy-text, newly-extracted claim, evidence, and source snapshot categories.

Review: Agent reviewedLast checkedMay 25, 2026Last changedMay 26, 2026Claims9Sources4Latest releasepublic-release-20260526-001Release records1
University pagePublic JSONMonthly reportUniversity index

Change summary

Current public record freshness and review state.

The Ohio State University currently has 9 source-backed claim records and 4 official source attributions. Latest tracked changed date: May 26, 2026. Latest tracker diff: 0 comparable policy-text changes, 2 newly extracted claims, 0 source snapshot changes.

This page combines all public release diffs for The Ohio State University. Individual release snapshots remain available from their release-specific URLs.

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.

Policy text0Newly extracted2Evidence0Source snapshots0Source text0Source added0Source removed0

Combined release diff

Unified tracker diff generated from all public release snapshots for this university.

The Ohio State University combined release diff

Comparing public-release-20260524-001 to public-release-20260526-001.

+6-0
11 # The Ohio State University AI policy diff
22 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
33 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
4+teaching: Ohio State guidance says instructors who permit AI should provide clear and precise parameters about tools, features, assignments, activities, and allowable use.
5+Evidence (en, 747e1d2cf851): If you want to permit students to use AI, it is important to provide clear and precise parameters about the kind of use you will permit, in order to avoid misunderstandings. This may vary by assignment and activity, and type of AI tool.
6+Source Last-Modified: 2026-05-22T20:22:59.000Z
47 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
58 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
9+teaching: Ohio State Arts and Sciences guidance provides sample course-level prohibition language stating students are not permitted to use AI tools in a course when that is the instructor's policy.
10+Evidence (en, 747e1d2cf851): Course-level Prohibition of Student Use of AI If students may not make any use of AI in your course, we recommend a statement along the following lines: Because you will best accomplish the goals of this course by undertaking all activities and assessments without AI assistance, you are not permitted to use any AI tools in this course.
11+Source Last-Modified: 2026-05-22T20:22:59.000Z

Release history

1 public release diff

public-release-20260526-001

Compared with public-release-20260524-001.

Policy text0Newly extracted2Source snapshots0Source text0
Release diffDiff JSON

The Ohio State University public-release-20260526-001 diff

Comparing public-release-20260524-001 to public-release-20260526-001.

+6-0
11 # The Ohio State University AI policy diff
22 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
33 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
4+teaching: Ohio State guidance says instructors who permit AI should provide clear and precise parameters about tools, features, assignments, activities, and allowable use.
5+Evidence (en, 747e1d2cf851): If you want to permit students to use AI, it is important to provide clear and precise parameters about the kind of use you will permit, in order to avoid misunderstandings. This may vary by assignment and activity, and type of AI tool.
6+Source Last-Modified: 2026-05-22T20:22:59.000Z
47 ## Newly extracted tracker claim
58 This claim was newly extracted or newly promoted in the tracker release. It is not necessarily newly published by the university.
9+teaching: Ohio State Arts and Sciences guidance provides sample course-level prohibition language stating students are not permitted to use AI tools in a course when that is the instructor's policy.
10+Evidence (en, 747e1d2cf851): Course-level Prohibition of Student Use of AI If students may not make any use of AI in your course, we recommend a statement along the following lines: Because you will best accomplish the goals of this course by undertaking all activities and assessments without AI assistance, you are not permitted to use any AI tools in this course.
11+Source Last-Modified: 2026-05-22T20:22:59.000Z

Claim changes

9 claim records

teaching

Ohio State Arts and Sciences guidance provides sample course-level prohibition language stating students are not permitted to use AI tools in a course when that is the instructor's policy.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence86%Evidence1Languagesen

teaching

Ohio State guidance says instructors who permit AI should provide clear and precise parameters about tools, features, assignments, activities, and allowable use.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence86%Evidence1Languagesen

ai_tool_treatment

Ohio State responsible-use guidance says students should use GenAI tools for coursework only with the explicit permission of each instructor, and only in the ways allowed by that instructor.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence95%Evidence1Languagesen

academic_integrity

Ohio State Arts and Sciences guidance quotes the OSU Committee on Academic Misconduct policy that generative AI tools should not be used to complete course assignments unless the course instructor specifically authorizes their use.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence95%Evidence1Languagesen

privacy

Ohio State teaching guidance says data entered in AI applications using a personal account will not be protected, and users must log in to an approved AI tool with Ohio State credentials before entering institutional data above S1.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence94%Evidence1Languagesen

security_review

Ohio State OTDI guidance says unvetted AI tools should not receive institutional data above S1, and users should enter only the data necessary when using approved AI tools with institutional data.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence94%Evidence1Languagesen

privacy

Ohio State responsible-use guidance says public GenAI prompts should be considered public and used to train AI models, while prompts and results in Ohio State-provided Copilot Chat, Gemini, and Microsoft 365 Copilot are protected inside OSU's environment and not used to train public AI models.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence93%Evidence1Languagesen

teaching

Ohio State teaching guidance recommends that instructors establish expectations for academic integrity and AI use early, include university academic-integrity policies in the syllabus, and communicate course-specific GenAI expectations.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence92%Evidence1Languagesen

ai_tool_treatment

Ohio State teaching guidance says the university has reviewed and vetted standalone generative AI applications for faculty, staff, and students, including Microsoft Copilot, Adobe Firefly, and Google Gemini.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence91%Evidence1Languagesen

Source snapshots

4 source attributions