Policy presence
University of Arkansas Fayetteville has 2 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Fayetteville, United States
University of Arkansas Fayetteville has 2 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
University of Arkansas Fayetteville has 1 source-backed public claim for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: required.
University of Arkansas Fayetteville has 4 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
University of Arkansas Fayetteville has 4 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
No source-backed public claim about privacy or data-entry restrictions is present in this profile.
The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about personal, confidential, sensitive, regulated, or student data entry into AI tools.
University of Arkansas Fayetteville has 2 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: required.
University of Arkansas Fayetteville has 3 source-backed public claims for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
University of Arkansas Fayetteville has 1 source-backed public claim for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: allowed.
University of Arkansas Fayetteville has 3 source-backed public claims for teaching guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
University of Arkansas Fayetteville has 1 source-backed public claim for research guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
University of Arkansas Fayetteville has 1 source-backed public claim for security and procurement; deterministic analysis status: required.
6 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Academic Integrity
Normalized value: students need instructor permission before using generative AI for academic work
Oorspronkelijk bewijs
Evidence 1Students must receive permission in advance to use any generative AI technology in completing academic work from their instructor.
Teaching
Normalized value: faculty discretion with approved syllabus language options for AI use
Oorspronkelijk bewijs
Evidence 1UARK faculty have discretion over whether generative artificial intelligence tools (e.g., ChatGPT) can be used by students in their courses. Faculty are encouraged to communicate clear expectations regarding how these resources can be used in their courses, if at all.
Ai Tool Treatment
Normalized value: approved AI tools include Copilot Chat, Copilot for Microsoft 365, OpenAI ChatGPT Edu, Google Gemini, and Google NotebookLM
Oorspronkelijk bewijs
Evidence 1The following AI tools are approved and available now for campus use: Copilot Chat; Copilot for Microsoft 365; OpenAI ChatGPT Edu; Google Gemini; Google NotebookLM.
Academic Integrity
Normalized value: AI-generated text should be cited when it is not original work
Oorspronkelijk bewijs
Evidence 1To avoid plagiarizing, students are expected to provide citations for anything that is not their original work. This includes text generated by artificial intelligence.
Source Status
Normalized value: campus advisory identifies AI acceptable-use guidelines for employees and students
Oorspronkelijk bewijs
Evidence 1All employees and students must adhere to the guidelines for acceptable use of artificial intelligence. These guidelines were developed by AI working groups, which are composed of staff and faculty from units across campus.
Security Review
Normalized value: unapproved AI tools require a tool exception request
Oorspronkelijk bewijs
Evidence 1If an employee or student would like to use an AI tool that isn't approved, this tool exception request form will need to be completed.
0 machine or needs-review claim
3 source attribution
honesty.uark.edu
libguides.uark.edu
news.uark.edu