Policy presence
Georgetown University has 1 source-backed public claim for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Washington D.C., United States
Georgetown University
Georgetown University is listed as QS 2026 rank =285. Georgetown University has 4 source-backed AI policy claim records from 4 official source attributions. The public record preserves original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, snapshot hashes, confidence, and review state.
Short answer
v1 public contract
Georgetown University is listed as QS 2026 rank =285. Georgetown University has 4 source-backed AI policy claim records from 4 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 Georgetown University 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 4 official source attributions. Original-language evidence snippets and source URLs remain canonical, with public JSON available at https://eduaipolicy.org/api/public/v1/universities/georgetown-university.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 Privacy claims.
- Evidence includes AI tool treatment claims.
- Evidence includes Other policy claims.
- Evidence includes Teaching claims.
- No specific AI service name is highlighted by the current public claim text.
- Teaching, assessment, coursework, or syllabus-related language appears in the public claim text.
- Privacy, sensitive-data, or security 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
No source-backed public claim about AI disclosure or acknowledgement is present in this profile.
The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about disclosing, acknowledging, citing, or declaring AI use.
Coursework
Georgetown University has 2 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: required.
Exams
Georgetown University has 2 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: required.
Privacy and data entry
Georgetown University has 1 source-backed public claim for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Academic integrity
No source-backed public claim about academic-integrity treatment of AI use is present in this profile.
The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about AI use under academic integrity, misconduct, dishonesty, plagiarism, or cheating rules.
Approved tools
Georgetown University has 2 source-backed public claims for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Named AI services
Georgetown University has 2 source-backed public claims for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Teaching guidance
Georgetown University has 1 source-backed public claim 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.
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
Privacy
Georgetown's AI privacy guidance says personally identifiable information should be used only with university-evaluated and approved systems or with consent, unless another approved legal or university process applies.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: pii_only_in_evaluated_approved_ai_systems_or_with_consent
Original evidence
Evidence 1Members of the Georgetown community must ensure that personally identifiable information is only used with systems that have been evaluated and approved by the university, or when individuals have provided their consent (unless permitted by applicable law or through an approved university process, such as IRB review).
Ai Tool Treatment
Georgetown's AI Tools page lists UIS-reviewed AI tools and says unapproved AI tools used for Georgetown matters should go through UIS technology review.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: uis_reviewed_ai_tools_and_review_required_for_unapproved_tools
Original evidence
Evidence 1If you are using an AI tool, for a Georgetown matter, that has not yet been approved, you should contact UIS for a technology review to ensure that any necessary terms of use are protective of and acceptable to the university.
Other
Georgetown states that AI use by members of its community must remain aligned with current university policies.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: ai_use_aligned_with_current_university_policies
Original evidence
Evidence 1Use of AI by members of the Georgetown community must remain aligned with current university policies.
Teaching
Georgetown CNDLS advises that instructors should provide clear course or assignment policies about whether and how students may use AI tools.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: instructors_should_set_clear_course_or_assignment_ai_policies
Original evidence
Evidence 1Students are being guided to refer to individual course and assignment policies outlined by the instructor to determine whether or not they are able to use AI tools at any stage in an assignment.
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
4 source attribution
AI Tools
aiguidelines.georgetown.edu
Developing course policies - Artificial Intelligence (AI) Toolkit - CNDLS
cndls.georgetown.edu
Guidelines for the Georgetown Community on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence
aiguidelines.georgetown.edu
Privacy
aiguidelines.georgetown.edu
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.