Policy presence
Birkbeck, University of London has 4 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
London, United Kingdom
Birkbeck, University of London
Birkbeck, University of London is listed as QS 2026 rank =388. Birkbeck, University of London has 4 source-backed AI policy claim records from 2 official source attributions. The public record preserves original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, snapshot hashes, confidence, and review state.
Short answer
v1 public contract
Birkbeck, University of London is listed as QS 2026 rank =388. Birkbeck, University of London has 4 source-backed AI policy claim records from 2 official source attributions. The public record preserves original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, snapshot hashes, confidence, and review state.
Citation-ready summary
As of this public record, University AI Policy Tracker lists Birkbeck, University of London as an agent-reviewed AI policy record last checked on May 16, 2026 and last changed on May 16, 2026. The record contains 4 source-backed claims, including 4 reviewed claims, from 2 official source attributions. Original-language evidence snippets and source URLs remain canonical, with public JSON available at https://eduaipolicy.org/api/public/v1/universities/birkbeck-university-of-london.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 Academic integrity claims.
- Evidence includes AI tool treatment claims.
- Named AI services detected in public claims: ChatGPT.
- Teaching, assessment, coursework, or syllabus-related 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
Birkbeck, University of London has 1 source-backed public claim for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: required.
Coursework
Birkbeck, University of London has 4 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: required.
Exams
Birkbeck, University of London has 4 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: required.
Privacy and data entry
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.
Academic integrity
Birkbeck, University of London has 3 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: required.
Approved tools
Birkbeck, University of London has 1 source-backed public claim for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Named AI services
Birkbeck, University of London has 2 source-backed public claims for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: conditionally_allowed.
Teaching guidance
No source-backed public claim about teaching guidance is present in this profile.
The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about instructor, classroom, assessment-design, or syllabus guidance.
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.
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
4 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Academic Integrity
Birkbeck's student AI guidance states that the AI Declaration must be submitted with all assessments submitted to, or completed on, Moodle, including assessments where the brief permits no AI use.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: ai_declaration_required_for_moodle_assessments
Original evidence
Evidence 1The AI Declaration must be submitted with all assessments submitted to, or completed on, Moodle, including those where no AI use is permitted by the Assessment Brief.
Ai Tool Treatment
Birkbeck's student AI guidance says students should use AI tools, including generative AI, only to the extent outlined in the assessment brief, and should not use them where the brief explicitly does not permit them.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: assessment_brief_scoped_ai_use
Original evidence
Evidence 1You should only use AI tools, including generative AI, to the extent that has been outlined in the assessment brief. Some assessments will permit the use of AI tools for some aspects of your work, while others will not permit any use of AI tools at all.
Academic Integrity
Birkbeck's student AI guidance says students should retain evidence of their use of AI tools, such as transcripts or screenshots of prompts and outputs, because it may be requested if work is flagged for possible academic misconduct.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: students_should_retain_ai_prompts_outputs
Original evidence
Evidence 1You should retain evidence of your use of AI tools including generative AI. This could be in the form of transcripts or screenshots of prompts and outputs.
Academic Integrity
Birkbeck's Academic Integrity and Misconduct policy includes using generative AI tools such as ChatGPT to create assessment content or argument presented as the student's own intellectual work within its description of contract cheating, unless generative AI use is permitted in the assessment brief with guidance.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: unauthorized_ai_generated_content_can_be_contract_cheating
Original evidence
Evidence 1This might include using generative artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT to create content and/or argument for your assessment which you then present as your own intellectual work. If you are permitted to use generative AI tools to create content, this will be included in the assessment brief with guidance.
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
2 source attribution
Academic Integrity and Misconduct (AIM) Policy and Procedures
bbk.ac.uk
AI guidance for students, 2025-26 academic year
bbk.ac.uk
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.