Policy presence
Harvard University has 5 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Cambridge, United States
Harvard University
Harvard University has 14 source-backed AI policy claims from 12 official source attributions. Review state: agent reviewed; 14 reviewed claims. Last checked May 25, 2026.
Harvard University AI policy short answer
v1 public contract
Harvard University has 14 source-backed AI policy claims from 12 official source attributions, including 14 reviewed claims. The record review state is agent reviewed; original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, confidence, and public JSON are preserved for citation. Last checked May 25, 2026. Discovery context: Harvard University is listed as QS 2026 rank 5.
Citation-ready summary
As of this public record, University AI Policy Tracker lists Harvard University as an agent-reviewed AI policy record last checked on May 25, 2026 and last changed on May 26, 2026. The record contains 14 source-backed claims, including 14 reviewed claims, from 12 official source attributions. Original-language evidence snippets and source URLs remain canonical, with public JSON available at https://eduaipolicy.org/api/public/v1/universities/harvard-university.json. The entity-level confidence is 95%. This tracker is not legal advice, not academic integrity advice, and not an official university statement unless the linked source is the university's own official page.
Policy signals in this record
- Evidence includes Other policy claims.
- Evidence includes Teaching claims.
- Evidence includes Procurement claims.
- Evidence includes Privacy claims.
- Evidence includes Academic integrity claims.
- Evidence includes AI tool treatment claims.
- Named AI services detected in public claims: ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Gemini.
- Disclosure, acknowledgment, citation, or attribution language appears in the public claim text.
Review: Agent reviewed
This reference record summarizes visible public data only. Official sources and original-language evidence remain canonical; confidence is separate from review state.
This page 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.
Policy profile
Deterministic source-backed dimensions derived from this record's public claims.
Review: Machine candidate
Policy profile rows are machine-candidate derived metadata. They are not final policy conclusions; inspect the linked claim evidence before reuse.
Analysis page-quality metadata is available at /api/public/v1/analysis/page-quality.json.
AI disclosure
Harvard University has 3 source-backed public claims for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: required.
Coursework
Harvard University has 5 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Exams
Harvard University has 5 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Privacy and data entry
Harvard University has 5 source-backed public claims for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Academic integrity
Harvard University has 4 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Approved tools
Harvard University has 5 source-backed public claims for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Named AI services
Harvard University has 5 source-backed public claims for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Teaching guidance
Harvard University has 4 source-backed public claims for teaching guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Research guidance
Harvard University has 4 source-backed public claims for research guidance; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Security and procurement
Harvard University has 2 source-backed public claims for security and procurement; deterministic analysis status: required.
Coverage score measures breadth of public, source-backed coverage only. It is not a policy quality, strictness, legal adequacy, safety, or compliance score.
Evidence-backed claims
14 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Other
University-wide: Level 2 and above confidential data (including non-public research data, finance, HR, student records, medical information) should not be entered into publicly-available generative AI tools. Such data may only be entered into generative AI tools that have been assessed and approved by Harvard's Information Security and Data Privacy office.
Review: Agent reviewed
Evidencia original
Evidence 1You should not enter data classified as confidential (Level 2 and above, including non-public research data, finance, HR, student records, medical information, etc.) into publicly-available generative AI tools, in accordance with the University's Information Security Policy. Information shared with generative AI tools using default settings is not private and could expose proprietary or sensitive information to unauthorized parties. Level 2 and above confidential data must only be entered into generative AI tools that have been assessed and approved for such use by Harvard's Information Security and Data Privacy office.
Teaching
FAS (Faculty of Arts and Sciences) Office of Undergraduate Education policy: All faculty are required to inform students of the policies governing generative AI use in class. Faculty should post their AI policy on their Canvas site.
Review: Agent reviewed
Evidencia original
Evidence 1All faculty are required to inform students of the policies governing generative AI use in class. ... Once you decide on a policy, make sure you articulate it clearly for your students, so that they know what is expected of them. More specifically, you should post your policy on your Canvas site.
Procurement
University-wide: All vendor generative AI tools not currently offered by HUIT must be assessed for risk by Harvard's Information Security and Data Privacy office prior to use in Harvard work. Contact HUIT before procuring any generative AI tool.
Review: Agent reviewed
Evidencia original
Evidence 1If you are considering procuring a generative AI tool not currently offered or have questions, please contact HUIT. All vendor generative AI tools must be assessed for risk by Harvard's Information Security and Data Privacy office prior to use in Harvard work.
Privacy
University-wide: AI meeting assistants (AI note takers or bots) should not be used in Harvard meetings, with the exception of approved tools with contractual protections including enterprise agreements with appropriate security and privacy protections, or tools as part of limited HUIT-directed pilot programs.
Review: Agent reviewed
Evidencia original
Evidence 1AI meeting assistants should not be used in Harvard meetings, with the exception of approved tools with contractual protections: Use only AI assistants for which Harvard has an enterprise agreement with the vendor including appropriate security and privacy protections, including: Approved tools as part of limited HUIT-directed pilot programs to evaluate the use of AI assistants within the Harvard environment.
Other
University-wide: Users are responsible for any content they publish or share that includes AI-generated material. AI-generated content may be inaccurate, misleading, entirely fabricated (hallucinations), or contain copyrighted material.
Review: Agent reviewed
Evidencia original
Evidence 1AI-generated content can be inaccurate, misleading, or entirely fabricated (sometimes called "hallucinations") or may contain copyrighted material. You are responsible for any content that you publish or share that includes AI-generated material.
Academic Integrity
HGSE (Harvard Graduate School of Education) school-level policy: Unless otherwise specified by the instructor, using generative AI to create all or part of an assignment (e.g., paper, memo, presentation, short response) and submitting it as one's own work violates the HGSE Academic Integrity Policy. Permissible uses include seeking clarification on concepts, brainstorming ideas, or generating scenarios that help contextualize learning.
Review: Agent reviewed
Evidencia original
Evidence 1Unless otherwise specified by your instructor, it is a violation of the HGSE Academic Integrity Policy to use generative AI to create all or part of an assignment for a course (e.g., a paper, memo, presentation, or short response) and submit it as your own. Permissible uses of generative AI in HGSE coursework include seeking clarification on concepts, brainstorming ideas, or generating scenarios that help contextualize what you are learning.
Academic Integrity
HGSE (Harvard Graduate School of Education) school-level policy: For any permitted use of generative AI tools, students must acknowledge and document that use in their assignment submission by explaining what tool(s) were used, prompts provided, and how the output was integrated into the work. Direct citations must use proper citation format.
Review: Agent reviewed
Evidencia original
Evidence 1For any permitted use of GenAI tools, you must acknowledge and document that use in your assignment submission by explaining what tool(s) you used, prompts you provided (if applicable), and how you integrated the output into your work. If you cite directly from the tool, use proper citation format to credit the source.
Privacy
HGSE (Harvard Graduate School of Education) school-level policy: It is forbidden to make personal recordings of any course meetings, with or without AI tool integrations. Uploading substantial course content is only allowable through the Harvard-approved AI Sandbox.
Review: Agent reviewed
Evidencia original
Evidence 1It is forbidden to make your own recording of any course meetings, with or without AI tool integrations. If you require or would prefer that course meetings be recorded, discuss this request with your instructor. Uploading any substantial course content — including text, video, readings, discussion-board pages, or audio recordings — is only allowable through the Harvard-approved AI Sandbox.
Privacy
FAS (Faculty of Arts and Sciences) Office of Undergraduate Education guidance: Faculty must get documented permission from students before putting original student content into any generative AI tool. No confidential information can be loaded into generative AI systems since there is no expectation of privacy or confidentiality.
Review: Agent reviewed
Evidencia original
Evidence 1Faculty must get documented permission from students before putting original student content into any generative AI tool, and students should be made aware of the risks of entering their original work into such tools. No confidential information can be loaded into GAI systems, since there is no expectation of privacy or confidentiality.
Academic Integrity
HMS (Harvard Medical School) Academic and Research Integrity guidance: AI tools cannot be listed as authors on a paper. Authors should be transparent when AI tools are used and provide information about how AI tools were used.
Review: Agent reviewed
Evidencia original
Evidence 1AI Tools cannot be listed as an author on a paper. Authors should be transparent when AI tools are used and provide information about how AI tools were used.
Other
University-wide: Only Harvard-offered versions of generative AI tools carry stated data classification protections. Publicly-available versions of the same tools should not be used for Harvard work. Approved tools (Harvard AI Sandbox, Google Gemini, Microsoft Copilot Chat, ChatGPT Edu, Adobe Firefly) are approved for Level 3 data and below.
Review: Agent reviewed
Evidencia original
Evidence 1Note: all data classification levels listed below apply only to the Harvard-offered versions of these tools and not to publicly-available versions of these tools (which should not be used for Harvard work). Harvard AI Sandbox - ... Level 3 data and below. Google Gemini ... Level 3 data and below. Microsoft Copilot Chat ... Level 3 data and below. OpenAI ChatGPT Edu ... Level 3 data and below. Adobe Firefly ... Level 3 data and below.
Academic Integrity
Harvard Medical School responsible AI guidance says users should verify outputs, uphold academic integrity, be transparent about acceptable use, and cite AI contributions appropriately in research and academic work.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: HMS responsible AI guidance requires verification, academic-integrity alignment, transparency, and appropriate citation of AI contributions.
Evidencia original
Evidence 1Verify outputs. Uphold academic integrity. Be transparent with students and colleagues about acceptable use. Cite AI contributions appropriately in research and academic work.
Ai Tool Treatment
Harvard Medical School lists supported generative AI tools and use cases, including Harvard AI Sandbox, ChatGPT Edu, Adobe Firefly, HMS Azure AI, HUIT API Portal, and Longwood Cluster, with access and training requirements.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: HMS identifies supported GenAI tools and use cases with access and training requirements.
Evidencia original
Evidence 1Text and code creation - Harvard AI Sandbox, ChatGPT Edu. Image creation - Harvard AI Sandbox, Adobe Firefly. App development - HUIT API Portal, HMS Azure AI, or Longwood Cluster.
Teaching
University-wide: Faculty should be clear with students about their policies on permitted uses of generative AI in classes and on academic work. Students are encouraged to ask instructors for clarification about these policies as needed.
Review: Agent reviewed
Evidencia original
Evidence 1Faculty should be clear with students they're teaching and advising about their policies on permitted uses, if any, of generative AI in classes and on academic work. Students are also encouraged to ask their instructors for clarification about these policies as needed.
Candidate claims
0 machine or needs-review claim
Candidate claims are not final policy conclusions. They preserve source URL, source snapshot hash, evidence, confidence, and review state so the record can be audited before review.
Official sources
12 source attribution
Academic Integrity and Teaching With(out) AI
oaisc.fas.harvard.edu
AI | Academic and Research Integrity
ari.hms.harvard.edu
AI Assistant Guidelines
huit.harvard.edu
AI Syllabus Policies
bokcenter.harvard.edu
Generative AI | HMS IT
it.hms.harvard.edu
Generative AI Guidance – Office of Undergraduate Education
oue.fas.harvard.edu
Generative AI Guidelines
huit.harvard.edu
Generative AI Tool Comparison
huit.harvard.edu
Guidance for Faculty on Addressing AI-Related Academic Integrity Issues
bokcenter.harvard.edu
Guidelines for Using ChatGPT and other Generative AI tools at Harvard
provost.harvard.edu
HGSE AI Policy on Student Use of Generative AI in Academic Work
registrar.gse.harvard.edu
Learn with Generative AI
harvard.edu
Change log
Source-check timeline and diff-style claim/evidence preview.
View the public change record for this university, including source snapshot hashes, claim review states, and a diff-style preview of current source-backed evidence.
Corrections and missing evidence
Corrections create review tasks and do not directly change this public record.
If an official source is missing, stale, moved, blocked, or incorrectly summarized, submit a source URL, policy change report, or institution correction for review. Corrections must preserve source URLs, source language, original evidence, review state, and audit history.