Policy presence
Keele University has 3 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Keele, United Kingdom
Keele University
Keele University has 4 source-backed AI policy claims from 2 official source attributions. Review state: agent reviewed; 4 reviewed claims. Last checked May 20, 2026.
Keele University AI policy short answer
v1 public contract
Keele University has 4 source-backed AI policy claims from 2 official source attributions, including 4 reviewed claims. The record review state is agent reviewed; original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, confidence, and public JSON are preserved for citation. Last checked May 20, 2026. Discovery context: Keele University is listed as QS 2026 rank 801-850.
Citation-ready summary
As of this public record, University AI Policy Tracker lists Keele University as an agent-reviewed AI policy record last checked on May 20, 2026 and last changed on May 20, 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/keele-university.json. The entity-level confidence is 96%. 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 Teaching claims.
- Evidence includes AI tool treatment claims.
- Named AI services detected in public claims: Microsoft Copilot.
- Disclosure, acknowledgment, citation, or attribution language appears in the 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
Keele University has 2 source-backed public claims for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: required.
Coursework
Keele University has 4 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Exams
Keele University has 4 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Privacy and data entry
Keele University has 1 source-backed public claim for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: required.
Academic integrity
Keele University has 2 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Approved tools
Keele University has 1 source-backed public claim for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: required.
Named AI services
Keele University has 1 source-backed public claim for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: required.
Teaching guidance
Keele 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
Academic Integrity
Keele's Student Academic Misconduct Code of Practice classifies inappropriate GenAI use in assessment as academic misconduct when a student presents work as their own without proper attribution or uses GenAI where it is explicitly prohibited.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: inappropriate_genai_use_academic_misconduct
Original evidence
Evidence 1Using GenAI tools inappropriately in an assessment to present work as one's own, without proper attribution, or where it is explicitly prohibited to use GenAI tools.
Teaching
Keele University's Generative AI in Education Framework says AI in education should be used responsibly, ethically, and equitably within Keele, and that staff and students should be supported to be AI-literate and use AI ethically.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: responsible_ethical_equitable_ai_education_framework
Original evidence
Evidence 1This framework is intended to ensure that AI in education is used responsibly, ethically, and equitably within Keele. It aims to support the integration of Generative AI in education and development and embedding of foundational AI literacies across staff and students.
Academic Integrity
Keele's framework says students must be advised on how AI can be used in assessments and that this must be clearly stated; it also says staff should remind students to disclose AI-tool use and cite it properly.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: assessment_ai_use_disclosure_and_clear_guidance
Original evidence
Evidence 1Staff should remind students that they must disclose when AI tools have been used in their work, that they require proper citation and refer them to the Academic Misconduct Code of Practice. Students must be advised on how AI can be used in assessments, and this must be clearly stated.
Ai Tool Treatment
Keele's framework identifies Microsoft Copilot as the institutional GenAI tool available free to staff and students as part of Microsoft Office 365, and says other AI tools must consider accessibility, equitable access, GDPR, and data privacy.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: microsoft_copilot_institutional_genai_tool
Original evidence
Evidence 1Microsoft Copilot is the institutional tool available free to staff and students as part of the MS Office 365 suite. Use of other AI tools must consider accessibility and equitable access along with GDPR and data privacy.
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
Generative AI in Education Framework
keele.ac.uk
Student Academic Misconduct Code of Practice
keele.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.