teaching
NUS states that instructors should be transparent about where and how they deploy AI in courses, including for generating content, virtual tutoring, and assessment feedback.
Review: Agent reviewed
Change log
National University of Singapore (NUS)
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.
National University of Singapore (NUS) currently has 8 source-backed claim records and 3 official source attributions. Latest tracked changed date: May 6, 2026. No tracker diff rows are recorded in the latest public release.
This page combines all public release diffs for National University of Singapore (NUS). 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.
National University of Singapore (NUS) combined release diff
Initial tracked release. Lines represent public claim/evidence records entering the release snapshot.
+16-0
11 # National University of Singapore (NUS) AI policy record
2+academic_integrity: NUS policy states that verdicts from AI detection tools are not admissible as conclusive evidence in disciplinary processes to charge students with academic dishonesty or to penalize student work.
3+Evidence (en, 96587c9cdfd8): The verdicts of current AI tools purported to determine whether an analyzed input has been generated by AI are not admissible as conclusive evidence in a disciplinary process to charge a student with academic dishonesty or as justification to penalize student work.
4+academic_integrity: NUS policy states that representing AI output as one's own work without acknowledgement is plagiarism; students who submit AI-generated work without acknowledging its use can be sanctioned for academic dishonesty.
5+Evidence (en, 96587c9cdfd8): Representing an AI's output as your own work, without any acknowledgement that you have used such a tool, is plagiarism. A student found to have submitted work generated by AI but failed to acknowledge their use of AI can still be sanctioned for plagiarism, assuming the case can be made.
6+teaching: NUS states that instructors should be transparent about where and how they deploy AI in courses, including for generating content, virtual tutoring, and assessment feedback.
7+Evidence (en, 96587c9cdfd8): Instructors should be transparent about where and how they deploy AI in NUS courses. This is especially important where AI is deployed to generate course content (including assessment questions), to function as virtual tutors to answer student queries, or to help with assessment feedback and grading.
8+teaching: NUS requires prior approval from Head of Department or relevant Deanery before using AI tools to provide instruction, feedback, or marks to students, submitted via an AI Risk Assessment.
9+Evidence (en, 96587c9cdfd8): The use of AI tools to provide instruction to learners in the form of responses, feedback and/or marks, whether as virtual tutors or as markers, requires prior approval by Head of Department or relevant Deanery, under the oversight of Chair of the AI-COP. Approval must be sought through submission of an AI Risk Assessment.
10+teaching: NUS policy sets the default assumption that AI tool use is permitted for unsupervised (take-home) assessments, provided use is duly acknowledged; assessments forbidding AI must be conducted in-person and instructor-supervised.
11+Evidence (en, 96587c9cdfd8): Conversely, the default assumption for any unsupervised (e.g., 'take home') assessment task is that the use of AI tools is permitted so long as the use is duly acknowledged. ... If the decision is that students should be forbidden from using AI tools for an assessment (for pedagogical reasons), then crucial aspects of that assessment should be conducted in-person and instructor-supervised.
12+procurement: NUS policy requires that wherever NUS data is involved, only NUS-approved AI tools should be used.
13+Evidence (en, 96587c9cdfd8): Wherever NUS data is involved, use NUS approved AI tools (see the list here).
14+source_status: NUS has an institutional Policy for Use of AI in Teaching and Learning, supplemented by AI guidelines infographics and resources for students.
15+Evidence (en, 60355f1b4cd7): NUS's Policy for Use of AI in Teaching and Learning; THE1005 on AI Use for Students on the NUSOne page
16+academic_integrity: NUS requires students to cite AI-generated content according to style guide conventions and to check assignment guidelines for specific AI use instructions.
17+Evidence (en, ee53c1275cea): Important! Always check your assignment guidelines for specific instructions on use of AI in your assignment. ... If you intend to publish your work, do note that in addition to style guides for citation, you may need to consult publishers' policies for using AI tools or including AI-generated content in writing.
Release history
0 public release diffs
Claim changes
8 claim records
academic_integrity
NUS policy states that verdicts from AI detection tools are not admissible as conclusive evidence in disciplinary processes to charge students with academic dishonesty or to penalize student work.
Review: Agent reviewed
academic_integrity
NUS policy states that representing AI output as one's own work without acknowledgement is plagiarism; students who submit AI-generated work without acknowledging its use can be sanctioned for academic dishonesty.
Review: Agent reviewed
teaching
NUS requires prior approval from Head of Department or relevant Deanery before using AI tools to provide instruction, feedback, or marks to students, submitted via an AI Risk Assessment.
Review: Agent reviewed
teaching
NUS policy sets the default assumption that AI tool use is permitted for unsupervised (take-home) assessments, provided use is duly acknowledged; assessments forbidding AI must be conducted in-person and instructor-supervised.
Review: Agent reviewed
procurement
NUS policy requires that wherever NUS data is involved, only NUS-approved AI tools should be used.
Review: Agent reviewed
source_status
NUS has an institutional Policy for Use of AI in Teaching and Learning, supplemented by AI guidelines infographics and resources for students.
Review: Agent reviewed
academic_integrity
NUS requires students to cite AI-generated content according to style guide conventions and to check assignment guidelines for specific AI use instructions.
Review: Agent reviewed
Source snapshots
3 source attributions
AI Guidelines - Library Essentials
official_guidance Tracker checked at May 5, 2026, 10:11 PM
Citing AI Tools (NEW!)
official_guidance Tracker checked at May 5, 2026, 10:11 PM
NUS Policy for Use of AI in Teaching and Learning
official_policy_page Tracker checked at May 5, 2026, 10:11 PM