Policy presence
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville has 5 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Knoxville, United States
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville has 6 source-backed AI policy claims from 4 official source attributions. Review state: agent reviewed; 6 reviewed claims. Last checked May 17, 2026.
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville AI policy short answer
v1 public contract
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville has 6 source-backed AI policy claims from 4 official source attributions, including 6 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 17, 2026. Discovery context: The University of Tennessee, Knoxville is listed as QS 2026 rank =607.
Citation-ready summary
As of this public record, University AI Policy Tracker lists The University of Tennessee, Knoxville as an agent-reviewed AI policy record last checked on May 17, 2026 and last changed on May 17, 2026. The record contains 6 source-backed claims, including 6 reviewed claims, from 4 official source attributions. Original-language evidence snippets and source URLs remain canonical, with public JSON available at https://eduaipolicy.org/api/public/v1/universities/the-university-of-tennessee-knoxville.json. The entity-level confidence is 95%. 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 Academic integrity claims.
- Evidence includes Teaching claims.
- Evidence includes AI tool treatment claims.
- No specific AI service name is highlighted by the current 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
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville has 1 source-backed public claim for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Coursework
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville has 4 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: required.
Exams
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville has 5 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: required.
Privacy and data entry
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville has 3 source-backed public claims for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Academic integrity
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville has 2 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: required.
Approved tools
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville has 1 source-backed public claim for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: conditionally_allowed.
Named AI services
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville has 2 source-backed public claims for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Teaching guidance
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville 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
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville has 1 source-backed public claim for security and procurement; deterministic analysis status: conditionally_allowed.
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
6 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Privacy
The University of Tennessee system AI policy says protected university data must not be entered into AI technology that has not been reviewed by the University CIO or designee and authorized for use.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: protected_university_data_requires_authorized_ai
Original evidence
Evidence 1Protected University Data shall not be entered into AI technology that has not been reviewed by the University’s Chief Information Officer (or designee) and authorized for use.
Localized display only
Protected University Data cannot be entered into AI technology unless it has been reviewed and authorized.
Academic Integrity
The University of Tennessee system AI policy says course-related communications must inform students that unpermitted AI use is a form of academic misconduct subject to the campus student code of conduct.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: unpermitted_ai_academic_misconduct
Original evidence
Evidence 1Course-related communications pertaining to the use of AI technology shall: (i) affirm the importance of academic honesty; and (ii) inform Students that the unpermitted use of AI technology is a form of academic misconduct.
Localized display only
Course communications must state that unpermitted AI use is academic misconduct.
Teaching
The University of Tennessee system AI policy, which includes UT Knoxville, expects course faculty or staff to communicate permitted AI uses for a course and says students are responsible for following those course-specific AI requirements.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: course_specific_ai_use_communication
Original evidence
Evidence 1Faculty/Staff Members responsible for the delivery of a course are expected to clearly communicate to Students the permitted use(s), if any, of AI technology in connection with a course.
Localized display only
Course staff are expected to communicate permitted AI uses, and students are responsible for course-specific AI requirements.
Teaching
UTK Writing Center guidance tells students that when an instructor allows GenAI for writing assignments, they should use it to assist rather than replace their writing process and should document and describe the use.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: genai_assist_not_replace_document_use
Original evidence
Evidence 1If your instructor allows you to use GenAI for writing assignments, use it to assist rather than replace your research and writing processes, and always document and describe your use.
Localized display only
Students are told to use GenAI as assistance, not a replacement, when instructors allow it, and to document their use.
Ai Tool Treatment
UTK Writing Center guidance says instructors may set different GenAI rules for each course, and the sample syllabus page presents open, moderate, and strict AI-use guideline examples.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: course_ai_rules_may_vary_open_moderate_strict
Original evidence
Evidence 1Read each instructor’s policy on using GenAI (found on the course syllabus), and follow each carefully. UTK instructors may make their own rules about whether and how you can use GenAI in their course.
Localized display only
UTK guidance says instructors may make their own course rules for whether and how students may use GenAI.
Original evidence
Evidence 2Each instructor may decide how best to shape the guidelines for their particular course; below are some types of guidelines you may see on your syllabi.
Localized display only
The sample syllabus page presents course-level AI guideline options.
Academic Integrity
UTK Libraries guidance says submitting generative-AI-created or rewritten assessment work as one's own is cheating, and advises students to check with professors and instructors about coursework use.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: ai_created_assessment_as_own_is_cheating
Original evidence
Evidence 1Getting a generative AI to create or re-write your assessment and then submitting that work as your own, is cheating. It is the same as asking another human to do your work for you.
Localized display only
UTK Libraries guidance treats AI-created or AI-rewritten assessment submitted as one's own as cheating.
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
4 source attribution
BT0035 - Policy on Artificial Intelligence
policy.tennessee.edu
GenAI Tools and Writing: Information and Guidelines for Students
writingcenter.utk.edu
Sample syllabus statements for AI Guidelines
writingcenter.utk.edu
Using Generative AI: Ethical & Evaluative Use
libguides.utk.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.