Policy presence
University of Missouri, Kansas City has 4 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Kansas City, United States
University of Missouri, Kansas City
Record status
Review: Agent reviewed
Policy profile
Review: Machine candidate
AI disclosure
University of Missouri, Kansas City has 1 source-backed public claim for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Coursework
University of Missouri, Kansas City has 5 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: required.
Exams
University of Missouri, Kansas City has 5 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Privacy and data entry
University of Missouri, Kansas City has 1 source-backed public claim for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: conditionally_allowed.
Academic integrity
University of Missouri, Kansas City has 3 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: required.
Approved tools
University of Missouri, Kansas City has 1 source-backed public claim for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Named AI services
University of Missouri, Kansas City has 5 source-backed public claims for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Teaching guidance
University of Missouri, Kansas City has 5 source-backed public claims for teaching guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Research guidance
No source-backed public claim about research AI use is present in this profile.
The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about research use, publication ethics, research data, grants, or human-subjects compliance.
Security and procurement
No source-backed public claim about AI security review or procurement is present in this profile.
The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about security review, procurement, vendor approval, risk assessment, authentication, SSO, or enterprise licensing.
AI tools
No tool-level evidence is published for this record yet. Broad AI tool mentions are not expanded into named tool conclusions.
Evidence-backed claims
7 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Privacy
UMKC tells instructors not to upload or copy and paste student work into generative AI products for assessment because doing so may violate FERPA.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: do_not_upload_student_work_to_genai_for_assessment_ferpa_risk
Evidencia original
Evidence 1Do not upload or copy and paste student work into any GenAI product to help with assessment, as this may violate FERPA.
Academic Integrity
UMKC does not recommend using AI detection tools as the single piece of evidence to support an academic integrity violation.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: ai_detectors_not_recommended_as_sole_academic_integrity_evidence
Evidencia original
Evidence 1Given the unreliability of these tools and the risk of false results, we do not recommend using these detection tools as the single piece of evidence to support a violation of the academic integrity policy.
Teaching
UMKC recommends that instructors include a policy in all syllabi about the use and misuse of generative AI tools such as ChatGPT.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: instructors_recommended_to_include_genai_syllabus_policy
Evidencia original
Evidence 1UMKC recommends that instructors include a policy in all their syllabi regarding the use (and misuse) of generative AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT) in their courses.
Ai Tool Treatment
UMKC presents restrictive, supervised, and permissive generative AI syllabus policy examples and tells instructors to determine which category their syllabus may fit under.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: restrictive_supervised_permissive_syllabus_options
Evidencia original
Evidence 1The examples have been arranged according to three degrees of AI use permissions: Restrictive, Supervised and Permissive. Determine which category your syllabus may fit under.
Academic Integrity
UMKC Libraries' ChatGPT student guide tells students to check with their instructor before using ChatGPT and provides citation guidance when ChatGPT is allowed in an academic assignment.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: students_check_instructor_and_cite_chatgpt_if_allowed
Evidencia original
Evidence 1Remember to check with your instructor. Some instructors might not allow any use of ChatGPT and others might allow only limited use. If you are allowed to use ChatGPT in an academic assignment, here are some guidelines for citing.
Academic Integrity
UMKC Libraries' ChatGPT student guide notes that instructors may ask for an appendix with prompts or the full transcript of a ChatGPT interaction.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: instructors_may_request_prompts_or_chatgpt_transcript_appendix
Evidencia original
Evidence 1Your instructor may also ask for an appendix that includes the prompts that you provided to ChatGPT or the full transcript of your interaction.
Teaching
UMKC CAFE's faculty AI page says instructors should have an AI usage policy outlined in the syllabus and be clear about what can and cannot be used.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: cafe_says_ai_usage_policy_in_syllabus_required
Evidencia original
Evidence 1Have an AI usage policy outlined in your syllabus (required). Be clear and specific about what can and cannot be used. For even better results, consider specifying approved usage for each assignment.
Candidate claims
0 machine or needs-review claim
Official sources
3 source attribution
Empowering Faculty with AI
umkc.edu
Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools and Sample Syllabus Policy Statements
umkc.edu
Library Student Guide to ChatGPT: Citing generative AI
libguides.library.umkc.edu