Policy presence
Purdue University has 5 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
West Lafayette, United States
Purdue University
Purdue University is listed as QS 2026 rank =88. Purdue University has 11 source-backed AI policy claim records from 5 official source attributions. The public record preserves original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, snapshot hashes, confidence, and review state.
Short answer
v1 public contract
Purdue University is listed as QS 2026 rank =88. Purdue University has 11 source-backed AI policy claim records from 5 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 Purdue University as an agent-reviewed AI policy record last checked on May 14, 2026 and last changed on May 14, 2026. The record contains 11 source-backed claims, including 11 reviewed claims, from 5 official source attributions. Original-language evidence snippets and source URLs remain canonical, with public JSON available at https://eduaipolicy.org/api/public/v1/universities/purdue-university.json. The entity-level confidence is 98%. 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 Other policy claims.
- Evidence includes Procurement claims.
- Evidence includes AI tool treatment claims.
- Evidence includes Teaching claims.
- Evidence includes Academic integrity claims.
- Evidence includes Security review claims.
- Named AI services detected in public claims: Microsoft Copilot.
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
Purdue University has 1 source-backed public claim for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Coursework
Purdue University has 5 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: conditionally_allowed.
Exams
Purdue University has 5 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Privacy and data entry
Purdue University has 4 source-backed public claims for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Academic integrity
Purdue University has 2 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: conditionally_allowed.
Approved tools
Purdue University has 4 source-backed public claims for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: required.
Named AI services
Purdue University has 5 source-backed public claims for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Teaching guidance
Purdue University has 4 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
Purdue University has 2 source-backed public claims for security and procurement; deterministic analysis status: required.
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
11 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Privacy
Purdue requires prior approval before Sensitive or Restricted Data is entered into AI tools, including training or testing AI tools.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: sensitive_restricted_data_requires_prior_approval
Original evidence
Evidence 1Sensitive and Restricted Data, as defined in the Acceptable Use policy, must not be entered into AI tools without prior approval. Usage cases include training or testing AI tools.
Localized display only
Prior approval is required before Sensitive or Restricted Data is entered into AI tools.
Other
Purdue allows AI to inform decision makers, but the AI Use policy says AI must not be the sole factor in personnel, award, or disciplinary decisions.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: ai_not_sole_factor_for_personnel_award_disciplinary_decisions
Original evidence
Evidence 1AI may be used to inform decision makers, but it must not be the sole factor used in making personnel, award or disciplinary decisions.
Localized display only
AI may inform decisions, but not be the sole factor in listed decision categories.
Procurement
Purdue requires a New IT Solutions and Services Review for AI tools not already on the approved AI tools list, whether developed externally or internally.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: unlisted_ai_tools_require_new_it_solutions_and_services_review
Original evidence
Evidence 1A New IT Solutions and Services Review is required for use of any AI tools, whether developed externally or internally, not already on the approved AI tools list.
Localized display only
AI tools outside the approved list require New IT Solutions and Services Review.
Ai Tool Treatment
Purdue's AI Use policy treats AI tools and university data used with them as IT Resources and Information Assets subject to Purdue acceptable-use and security/privacy policy controls.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: ai_tools_as_it_resources_and_data_as_information_assets
Original evidence
Evidence 1AI tools and the university data used with them are IT Resources and Information Assets, respectively, as defined within and subject to the Acceptable Use policy.
Localized display only
Purdue classifies AI tools and related university data under existing IT-resource and information-asset controls.
Teaching
Purdue teaching guidance says instructors should determine and tell students when AI use is authorized or unauthorized; authorization is determined at the course level.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: student_ai_authorization_determined_by_instructor_at_course_level
Original evidence
Evidence 1The instructor, therefore, should determine and inform students when the use of AI is authorized or unauthorized. Authorization is determined at the course level by the instructor.
Localized display only
Purdue places student AI-use authorization at the course level under instructor communication.
Academic Integrity
Purdue teaching guidance warns that an AI-detection positive result should not be the sole determining factor for an academic-integrity violation and subsequent consequences.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: ai_detection_positive_not_sole_factor_for_academic_integrity_violation
Original evidence
Evidence 1a positive result from one of these tools is not the sole determining factor of an academic integrity violation and subsequent consequences.
Localized display only
AI-detection results should not alone determine an academic-integrity violation or consequences.
Privacy
Purdue teaching guidance says instructors should commit to never sharing personally identifiable student information with third-party AI tools.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: instructors_should_never_share_student_pii_with_third_party_ai_tools
Original evidence
Evidence 1Commit to never sharing personally identifiable information about students with any third-party AI tool
Localized display only
Instructors should not share student PII with third-party AI tools.
Security Review
Purdue says AI use cases that use Purdue data or make decisions on behalf of humans must be reviewed and approved by the Data Ethics Committee.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: data_or_human_decision_use_cases_require_data_ethics_committee_review
Original evidence
Evidence 1Purdue University policy requires AI use cases that use Purdue data and/or make decisions on behalf of humans must be reviewed and approved by the Data Ethics Committee.
Localized display only
Purdue describes Data Ethics Committee review for AI use cases involving Purdue data or human-facing decisions.
Teaching
Purdue teaching guidance says instructors should include specific syllabus guidance on allowable AI-tool use, learning-process use, detection approaches, and potential consequences.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: syllabus_should_include_ai_use_detection_and_consequence_guidance
Original evidence
Evidence 1On the course syllabus, instructors should include specific guidance on: Allowable use of AI tools by students for assessed work in the course.
Localized display only
Purdue asks instructors to state AI expectations in course syllabi, including assessed-work uses.
Privacy
Purdue's AI toolkit tells users to treat data entered into AI tools as potentially public and not to input sensitive, confidential, or restricted data through the listed tools.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: toolkit_treat_ai_input_as_potentially_public_and_avoid_sensitive_confidential_restricted_data
Original evidence
Evidence 1When using AI tools, including those listed here, you should treat all data entered as potentially public. Do not input or process any sensitive, confidential or restricted data through these tools.
Localized display only
The toolkit gives a broad data-privacy caution for listed AI tools.
Ai Tool Treatment
Purdue's AI toolkit lists GenAI Studio, Copilot Chat, Teams Premium, M365 Copilot, and Scite as Purdue University AI tools with access terms for users.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: toolkit_lists_genai_studio_copilot_chat_teams_premium_m365_copilot_scite
Original evidence
Evidence 1Feature / Capability | GenAI Studio | Copilot Chat | Teams Premium | M365 Copilot | Scite | Access | Free to all | Free to all | $25 per user annually | $360 per user annually | Free to all
Localized display only
The toolkit table identifies Purdue University AI tools and access terms.
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
5 source attribution
AI Governance and Review
purdue.edu
Application of the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use Policy
purdue.edu
Artificial Intelligence Use (VII.A.5)
purdue.edu
Generative AI Toolkit
purdue.edu
Guidance on the Use of AI in Teaching and Learning
purdue.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.