Chicago, United States

Illinois Institute of Technology

Record status

Policy statusReviewed evidence-backed recordReview: Agent reviewedClaim coverage5 reviewedEvidence-backed claims5Reviewed5Candidate0Official sources3Source languageenPublic JSON/api/public/v1/universities/illinois-institute-of-technology.json

Policy profile

Coverage score90/100Coverage labelbroad public coverageReview: Machine candidateAnalysis confidence77%

AI disclosure

Illinois Institute of Technology has 1 source-backed public claim for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: recommended.

RecommendedMachine candidateConfidence75%Evidence1Sources1

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.

Not MentionedMachine candidateConfidence0%Evidence0Sources0

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.

Not MentionedMachine candidateConfidence0%Evidence0Sources0

Research guidance

Illinois Institute of Technology has 1 source-backed public claim for research guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.

RecommendedMachine candidateConfidence79%Evidence1Sources1

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.

Not MentionedMachine candidateConfidence0%Evidence0Sources0

AI tools

Derived tool records0

No tool-level evidence is published for this record yet. Broad AI tool mentions are not expanded into named tool conclusions.

Evidence-backed claims

5 reviewed evidence-backed public claim

Source Status

Illinois Tech publishes official Academic Affairs guidance on academic honesty and generative AI, and related Center for Learning Innovation resources for teaching and learning with AI.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence93%

Normalized value: official_ai_guidance_found

Original evidence

Evidence 1
This guideline on academic honesty and generative AI is intended to provide guidance for both students and faculty on engaging with generative AI productively, while still maintaining a rigorous and honest academic environment.

Academic Integrity

Illinois Tech's Academic Affairs guidance ties permitted use of generative AI or other outside resources to each course's learning objectives and syllabus expectations.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence92%

Normalized value: ai_use_course_objective_dependent

Original evidence

Evidence 1
This means that each syllabus needs to clearly define what the learning objectives are and be clear as to what is and is not allowed in terms of "outside" resources to demonstrate proficiency with that learning objective.

Academic Integrity

Illinois Tech guidance says misrepresenting proficiency by submitting someone else's product, directly or indirectly, is academic dishonesty.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence91%

Normalized value: misrepresentation_dishonesty

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Therefore, misrepresentation of proficiency by (getting either directly or indirectly someone else’s) product is dishonesty. It cheats the student of their needed personal development, and it is academic dishonesty, which results in disciplinary action.

Teaching

Illinois Tech's Center for Learning Innovation asks faculty to provide clear syllabus expectations for AI use and provides suggested syllabus language for no, some, and significant AI use.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence91%

Normalized value: syllabus_ai_expectations_guidance

Original evidence

Evidence 1
In the interest of transparency and academic integrity, faculty are asked to ensure their syllabus provides students with clear expectations regarding the use of AI in their courses. Below are recommended statements dependent on instructor expectations.

Teaching

Illinois Tech's suggested AI and assessment syllabus language says AI-assisted grading support should be explicitly stated in assignment instructions when such tools are used, with final grading oversight retained by the instructor.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence88%

Normalized value: ai_assisted_grading_disclosure_sample_language

Original evidence

Evidence 1
"While I may use AI-assisted tools to support the grading process and provide formative feedback, this will be explicitly stated in the assignment instructions whenever such tools are used. Regardless of the tools involved, please be assured that I maintain final oversight, review, and ultimate responsibility for all assigned grades."

Candidate claims

0 machine or needs-review claim

Official sources

3 source attribution

Change log

Last checkedMay 17, 2026Last changedMay 17, 2026Open change log

Corrections

Back to universities