Policy presence
Charles Darwin University has 5 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Casuarina, Australia
Charles Darwin University
Record status
Review: Agent reviewed
Policy profile
Review: Machine candidate
AI disclosure
Charles Darwin University has 3 source-backed public claims for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: required.
Coursework
Charles Darwin University has 3 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: required.
Exams
Charles Darwin University has 4 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: required.
Privacy and data entry
Charles Darwin University has 2 source-backed public claims for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Academic integrity
Charles Darwin University has 2 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: required.
Approved tools
Charles Darwin University has 3 source-backed public claims for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Named AI services
Charles Darwin University has 3 source-backed public claims for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
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
Charles Darwin University has 2 source-backed public claims for research guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Security and procurement
Charles Darwin University has 2 source-backed public claims for security and procurement; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
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
8 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Ai Tool Treatment
Charles Darwin University's formal Generative Artificial Intelligence Policy sets principles for GenAI use and applies to all CDU employees and students.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: formal_genai_policy_applies_employees_students
Original evidence
Evidence 1This policy sets out principles for the use of generative artificial intelligence (gen AI) at the University. This policy applies to all employees and students of the University.
Privacy
CDU prohibits employees and students from putting confidential or sensitive information or intellectual property into GenAI platforms.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: no_confidential_sensitive_information_or_ip_in_genai
Original evidence
Evidence 1Employees and students must ensure they do not put confidential or sensitive information or intellectual property into gen AI platforms.
Security Review
CDU staff may use generative AI tools for legitimate work purposes, but must not enter confidential, sensitive, or personally identifiable University information unless it is appropriately de-identified or redacted; tools with unclear hosting, ownership, or data handling must not be used with University information.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: staff_legitimate_work_use_with_security_and_data_handling_limits
Original evidence
Evidence 1Staff may use generative AI tools for legitimate work purposes; however, University information that is confidential, sensitive, or personally identifiable must not be entered into such tools unless it has been appropriately de-identified or redacted. Where the hosting location, ownership, or data-handling practices of a generative AI tool are unknown or unclear, the tool must not be used with University information.
Research
CDU's GenAI policy says GenAI use is never acceptable in peer review, in generating substantive content of research outputs including HDR theses, or in writing critical components of ethics applications.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: genai_never_acceptable_peer_review_substantive_research_outputs_ethics_application_components
Original evidence
Evidence 1There are circumstances when the use of gen AI is never acceptable. This includes in the conduct of peer review, the generation of substantive content of research outputs, including HDR theses, and in the writing of the critical components of ethics applications.
Procurement
CDU says it does not generally maintain a static approved, preferred, or endorsed GenAI platform list, and Design Authority approval is required before institutionally adopting new GenAI platforms that are implemented, integrated, or used to process University data.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: no_static_approved_platform_list_design_authority_required_for_institutional_adoption
Original evidence
Evidence 1The University does not generally maintain a static list of "approved", "preferred", or "endorsed" gen AI platforms. Approval by the Design Authority is required prior to the adoption of new gen AI platforms where they are to be institutionally implemented, integrated with University systems, or used to process University data.
Academic Integrity
CDU requires students and employees to be transparent about and disclose GenAI use, with academic integrity guidance applying to students.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: genai_use_disclosure_required
Original evidence
Evidence 1Students and employees must be transparent about and disclose gen AI use and should refer to the Academic Integrity Policy for more guidance on academic integrity.
Academic Integrity
CDU's academic integrity guidance identifies inappropriate or unsanctioned GenAI use as academic misconduct and says CDU will not tolerate misrepresenting AI-generated content as a student's own work or failing to disclose AI use.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: inappropriate_or_unsanctioned_genai_use_academic_misconduct
Original evidence
Evidence 1Types of Academic Misconduct include Generative artificial intelligence: Inappropriate or unsanctioned use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools. CDU staff and students will not tolerate: Misrepresenting AI generated content as your own; Failure to disclose use of AI.
Research
For HDR studies, CDU guidance says GenAI may assist but should not replace a candidate's original intellectual contribution, GenAI use should be clearly acknowledged, and supervisors or external examiners should not use GenAI to critique or assess candidate work.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: hdr_genai_assist_not_replace_acknowledge_no_ai_supervisor_examiner_assessment
Original evidence
Evidence 1GenAI tools may assist but should not replace the candidate's original intellectual contribution. Do I need to acknowledge GenAI use? Yes--clearly. Can I use GenAI to read, critique, or offer feedback on student work? No. Can I use GenAI to assess or critique candidate work? No.
Candidate claims
0 machine or needs-review claim
Official sources
4 source attribution
Academic Integrity
cdu.edu.au
Generative Artificial Intelligence Policy
policies.cdu.edu.au
Information Security and Access Policy
policies.cdu.edu.au
Using generative AI (GenAI) in HDR studies
cdu.edu.au