teaching
UNC-Chapel Hill says faculty should clearly explain when and how AI tools are used in assessment evaluation, including what comes from AI and what comes from instructor judgment.
Review: Agent reviewed
Change log
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Release-to-release tracker diff with separate policy-text, newly-extracted claim, evidence, and source snapshot categories.
Change summary
Current public record freshness and review state.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill currently has 7 source-backed claim records and 4 official source attributions. Latest tracked changed date: May 26, 2026. No tracker diff rows are recorded in the latest public release.
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.
Release diff
Unified tracker diff generated from the previous and current public release snapshots.
No tracker claim/evidence/source changes are recorded for this university in the latest public release.
Claim changes
7 claim records
security_review
UNC-Chapel Hill's administrative generative AI guidance says sensitive information should not be entered into generative AI tools unless the Information Security Office has completed a risk assessment and the Data Governance Oversight Group has approved the tool for sensitive information.
Review: Agent reviewed
teaching
UNC-Chapel Hill's faculty grading and assessment guidance says students must be able to request a full instructor-led review if they disagree with an AI-generated grade or have concerns about automated feedback.
Review: Agent reviewed
privacy
UNC-Chapel Hill's research guidance treats entering private or confidential information, research data, grant proposals, or analytical results into public generative AI tools as a public disclosure of that information.
Review: Agent reviewed
teaching
UNC-Chapel Hill's faculty grading and assessment guidance says AI systems used for grading or feedback must be institutionally approved and compliant with data security and privacy standards; faculty using GenAI for grading retain full responsibility for evaluative decisions and feedback.
Review: Agent reviewed
research
UNC-Chapel Hill's research generative AI guidance applies to members of the research community involved in research under the auspices of the University, including faculty, staff, students, guest researchers, collaborators, and consultants.
Review: Agent reviewed
teaching
UNC-Chapel Hill faculty guidance encourages instructors to state course and assignment AI expectations in the syllabus and tells Carolina students to follow the specific AI guidelines in that syllabus.
Review: Agent reviewed
Source snapshots
4 source attributions
Developing AI Guidance for Faculty - Generative AI at UNC
official_guidance Tracker checked at May 14, 2026, 2:12 PM
Guidance for Faculty Use of AI in Grading and Assessment
official_pdf Source Last-Modified Mar 4, 2026, 7:34 PM
Research Generative AI Usage Guidance - Generative AI at UNC
official_guidance Tracker checked at May 14, 2026, 2:12 PM
Staff Generative AI Usage Guidance - Generative AI at UNC
official_guidance Tracker checked at May 14, 2026, 2:12 PM