London, United Kingdom

Queen Mary University of London

Record status

Policy statusReviewed evidence-backed recordReview: Agent reviewedClaim coverage7 reviewedEvidence-backed claims7Reviewed7Candidate0Official sources6Source languageenPublic JSON/api/public/v1/universities/queen-mary-university-of-london.json

Policy profile

Coverage score90/100Coverage labelbroad public coverageReview: Machine candidateAnalysis confidence80%

AI disclosure

Queen Mary University of London has 1 source-backed public claim for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: recommended.

RecommendedMachine candidateConfidence81%Evidence1Sources1

Coursework

Queen Mary University of London has 2 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: required.

RequiredMachine candidateConfidence80%Evidence2Sources2

Exams

Queen Mary University of London has 2 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: required.

RequiredMachine candidateConfidence80%Evidence2Sources2

Approved tools

Queen Mary University of London has 2 source-backed public claims for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: restricted.

RestrictedMachine candidateConfidence80%Evidence2Sources2

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.

Not MentionedMachine candidateConfidence0%Evidence0Sources0

Research guidance

Queen Mary University of London has 2 source-backed public claims for research guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.

RecommendedMachine candidateConfidence80%Evidence2Sources2

Security and procurement

Queen Mary University of London has 1 source-backed public claim for security and procurement; deterministic analysis status: required.

RequiredMachine candidateConfidence78%Evidence1Sources1

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

7 reviewed evidence-backed public claim

Privacy

Queen Mary staff guidance says open-access GenAI tools are not secure for institutional data, and directs staff to use institutional Microsoft Copilot for sensitive, confidential, or internal-use-only information while not sharing internal-use Queen Mary data with external AI tools.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence96%

Normalized value: Staff guidance directs sensitive/internal Queen Mary data to institutional Copilot, not external AI tools

Original evidence

Evidence 1
It’s important to remember that data entered into open-access GenAI tools - including widely used platforms such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and others - is not secure. Use Microsoft Copilot when working with sensitive, confidential, or internal-use-only information. Do not share any Queen Mary data designated for internal use with external AI tools.

Localized display only

For staff, sensitive, confidential, or internal-use Queen Mary information should use institutional Copilot; internal-use data should not be shared with external AI tools.

Academic Integrity

Queen Mary student guidance says any use of Generative AI must align with the Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy, and that AI use may be acceptable in some scenarios but not all.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence96%

Normalized value: Student GenAI use must align with Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy; acceptable uses vary by scenario

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Any use of Generative AI must align with Queen Mary’s Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy. AI use may be acceptable in some scenarios, but not all.

Localized display only

Students are told GenAI use must align with the Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy and may be acceptable only in some scenarios.

Research

Queen Mary Doctoral College guidance tells postgraduate researchers to decide with supervisors which GenAI systems to use and why, keep detailed records of inputs and outputs, and reference and declare GenAI use in their work.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence95%

Normalized value: PGR GenAI use should be planned with supervisors, recorded, referenced, and declared

Original evidence

Evidence 1
With your supervisors, decide which system(s) you will use, why you will use them, and how you will use them. Keep detailed records of your inputs and outputs. Reference GenAI information and declare its use in your work.

Localized display only

PGRs are guided to plan GenAI use with supervisors and keep records of inputs and outputs.

Privacy

Queen Mary IT FAQs say staff using built-in Copilot with a Queen Mary account get Microsoft 365 environment protections, and inputs are not stored or used for external model training.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence94%

Normalized value: Built-in Copilot with Queen Mary account keeps data in Microsoft 365 environment and does not use inputs for external model training

Original evidence

Evidence 1
The green shield icon confirms you’re using the Queen Mary secure version of Copilot. This means: Your data stays within the Queen Mary’s Microsoft 365 environment. It meets institutional security and data protection requirements. Inputs are not stored or used for external model training.

Localized display only

Queen Mary describes the signed-in, green-shield Copilot experience as keeping data within its Microsoft 365 environment and not using inputs for external model training.

Source Status

Queen Mary publishes an official AI education guidance page that links AI principles, staff guidance, student guidance, PGR guidance, academic integrity resources, and the Policy Zone rather than presenting the guidance page itself as a standalone binding AI policy.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence93%

Normalized value: Official AI education guidance hub links staff, student, PGR, academic integrity, and policy-zone resources

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Our innovative use of AI in education is supported by policy and guidance for educators and students. Guidance for staff and students: Staff Guide to Generative AI; Student Guide to Generative AI; Academic Integrity at Queen Mary; AI for student learning and research; AI guidance for PGRs.

Localized display only

Queen Mary frames AI in education as supported by policy and guidance, and links staff, student, PGR, academic integrity and Policy Zone resources.

Procurement

Queen Mary IT FAQs say staff intending to use Queen Mary data with a free AI tool must submit the tool for approval through the Ideas portal before using it.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence92%

Normalized value: Free AI tools involving Queen Mary data require pre-use approval via Ideas portal

Original evidence

Evidence 1
If you intend to use Queen Mary data (such as staff, student, research, or confidential information) with a free tool, you must submit the tool for approval via the Ideas portal – Software Request before you start using the tool

Localized display only

For free AI tools involving Queen Mary data, the FAQ requires approval through the Ideas portal before use.

Academic Integrity

Queen Mary’s Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy applies to all Queen Mary students and says actions undermining academic integrity may be misconduct in assessment or learning activities, including formative assessment.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence91%

Normalized value: Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy applies to all students and can cover assessment or learning activities including formative assessment

Original evidence

Evidence 1
The Academic Integrity & Misconduct Policy applies to all students at Queen Mary. Academic Integrity is essential in all areas of academic life. Actions that undermine integrity may be considered misconduct in any assessment or activity, including formative assessment or learning activities.

Localized display only

The academic integrity policy applies to all students and may cover misconduct in assessments or learning activities, including formative work.

Candidate claims

0 machine or needs-review claim

Official sources

6 source attribution

Change log

Last checkedMay 14, 2026Last changedMay 14, 2026Open change log

Corrections

Back to universities