Policy presence
Ewha Womans University has 3 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Seoul, South Korea
Ewha Womans University
Record status
Review: Agent reviewed
Policy profile
Review: Machine candidate
AI disclosure
Ewha Womans University has 1 source-backed public claim for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Coursework
Ewha Womans University has 1 source-backed public claim for coursework; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Exams
Ewha Womans University has 3 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: conditionally_allowed.
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
Ewha Womans University has 1 source-backed public claim for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Approved tools
No source-backed public claim identifying approved or licensed AI tools is present in this profile.
The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence that identifies institutionally approved, licensed, procured, or enterprise AI tools.
Named AI services
No source-backed public claim naming a specific AI service is present in this profile.
The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence naming a specific AI service.
Teaching guidance
Ewha Womans University has 3 source-backed public claims for teaching guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
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.
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
3 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Academic Integrity
Ewha's class-stage AI-use guidance says course guidance may state that copying generative-AI outputs directly into assignments or exams, fabricating or spreading false information with generative AI, infringing copyright with generative AI, or otherwise harming academic truthfulness and trust may be considered misconduct.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: course_guidance_example_lists_possible_misconduct
Original evidence
Evidence 1단, 다음 행위는 부정행위로 간주될 수 있습니다. 1) 생성형 AI를 활용한 산출물을 복사하여 과제 및 시험에 그대로 붙여 제출하는 행위 2) 생성형 AI를 활용하여 허위 정보를 작성하거나 조작, 유포하는 행위 3) 생성형 AI를 활용하여 타인의 저작권을 불법적으로 침해하는 행위 4) 기타 학문적 진실성과 신뢰성을 해치는 행위
Localized display only
The guidance says directly copying AI outputs into assignments or exams, fabricating or spreading false information with AI, infringing copyright with AI, or harming academic truthfulness and trust may be considered misconduct.
Teaching
Ewha's class-stage AI-use guidance cautions that AI-detection programs can be used to check whether assignments used generative AI, but that such tools are not yet perfect and ethical use should be discussed with students.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: ai_detection_caution
Original evidence
Evidence 1AI 탐지 프로그램을 활용하여 과제 결과물의 생성형 AI 등의 사용 여부를 확인할 수 있습니다. 그러나 아직까지 탐지 프로그램을 사용한다고 하더라도 완벽하게 판단하기는 어렵습니다.
Localized display only
The guidance says AI-detection programs may be used to check AI use in assignments, but even with detection programs it is still difficult to judge perfectly.
Teaching
Ewha's class-stage AI-use guidance presents course-level generative-AI use as something instructors may define by explaining whether and how AI use is allowed and by asking students to disclose how they used generative AI in assignments.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: instructor_defined_course_scope_and_disclosure_examples
Original evidence
Evidence 1본 교과에서 생성형 AI의 활용 여부, 활용 방법 등은 교수자의 안내를 따르는 것을 원칙으로 합니다.
Localized display only
The course example says whether and how generative AI may be used follows the instructor's guidance.
Original evidence
Evidence 2생성형 AI를 활용했을 경우, 어떻게 사용하였는지에 대해 과제에 명확히 밝힌다.
Localized display only
The guidance gives as an ethical-use example that, if generative AI was used, the assignment clearly states how it was used.
Candidate claims
0 machine or needs-review claim
Official sources
2 source attribution
생성형 AI 활용 윤리지침 | 이화여자대학교 THE BEST 교육 통합지원 서비스
thebest.ewha.ac.kr
수업단계별 AI 활용지침 | 이화여자대학교 THE BEST 교육 통합지원 서비스
thebest.ewha.ac.kr