Policy presence
Kingston University, London has 3 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Kingston upon Thames, United Kingdom
Kingston University, London
Kingston University, London has 5 source-backed AI policy claims from 3 official source attributions. Review state: agent reviewed; 5 reviewed claims. Last checked May 18, 2026.
Kingston University, London AI policy short answer
v1 public contract
Kingston University, London has 5 source-backed AI policy claims from 3 official source attributions, including 5 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 18, 2026. Discovery context: Kingston University, London is listed as QS 2026 rank =660.
Citation-ready summary
As of this public record, University AI Policy Tracker lists Kingston University, London as an agent-reviewed AI policy record last checked on May 18, 2026 and last changed on May 18, 2026. The record contains 5 source-backed claims, including 5 reviewed claims, from 3 official source attributions. Original-language evidence snippets and source URLs remain canonical, with public JSON available at https://eduaipolicy.org/api/public/v1/universities/kingston-university-london.json. The entity-level confidence is 97%. 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 AI tool treatment claims.
- Evidence includes Source status claims.
- No specific AI service name is highlighted by the current public claim text.
- 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.
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
Kingston University, London has 3 source-backed public claims for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: required.
Coursework
Kingston University, London has 4 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: required.
Exams
Kingston University, London has 4 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: required.
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
Kingston University, London has 4 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: required.
Approved tools
Kingston University, London has 1 source-backed public claim for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Named AI services
Kingston University, London has 1 source-backed public claim for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
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
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
5 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Academic Integrity
Kingston University's 2025/26 Academic Integrity procedure defines unacceptable use of generative AI as presenting AI-generated content as one's own without proper acknowledgement, except when the assessment brief explicitly permits it.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: unacceptable_genai_presenting_ai_content_without_acknowledgement_unless_assessment_brief_permits
Original evidence
Evidence 1The University defines the unacceptable use of Generative Artificial Intelligence as the act of presenting content generated by artificial intelligence tools (such as text, media, tables etc - list not exhaustive), as one's own without proper acknowledgement, except where the nature of the assessment makes this permissible and is explicitly stated in the assessment brief.
Academic Integrity
Kingston University's AG2 guidance says that if generative AI is used as part of the editorial process, the student must acknowledge that use.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: generative_ai_editorial_process_use_must_be_acknowledged
Original evidence
Evidence 1Where a Generative AI has been used as part of the editorial process, then this must be acknowledged by the student.
Academic Integrity
Kingston University's 2025/26 Academic Integrity procedure says contributions by artificial intelligence tools must be properly acknowledged.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: ai_contributions_must_be_acknowledged
Original evidence
Evidence 1Contributions by artificial intelligence (AI) tools must also be properly acknowledged.
Ai Tool Treatment
Kingston University's AG2 editorial-help guidance covers software tools including generative AI when students use third-party help in draft or final assessment work.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: generative_ai_treated_as_possible_third_party_editorial_help
Original evidence
Evidence 1This guidance is for use when a student is considering whether to employ a third party such as a professional copy editing or proof-reading company or software tool (including generative artificial intelligence (GAI)) when producing work in draft or final version.
Source Status
Kingston University's 2025/26 regulation-change summary states that AR6 and AR7 introduced a formal definition of generative AI use within types of academic misconduct, and that AG2 became standalone guidance referencing AI and non-AI editorial help.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: 2025_26_genai_academic_integrity_definition_and_ag2_editorial_help_source_status
Original evidence
Evidence 1Introduction of a formal definition of use of generative artificial intelligence articulated within our current different types for academic misconduct. This guidance was previously published as an Annex within the Academic Integrity Procedures for Taught and Research degrees (AR6 and AR7) but has been reviewed as a new standalone document which references both AI and non-AI editorial help.
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
3 source attribution
Academic Guidance 2: Guidance on Editorial Help for Student Assessment 2025-2026
assets.kingston.ac.uk
Academic Integrity Taught Courses 2025-2026
assets.kingston.ac.uk
Policies and regulations - Summary of changes to regulations for 2025-2026
assets.kingston.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.