Coursework & Assessment
Transparency & Literacy
The Faculty of Law report discusses the importance of transparency and AI literacy for students and teachers in light of international practices.
São Paulo, Brazil Last checked
Universidade de São Paulo
Compare universities
Selected universities1/4
Universidade de São Paulo
Independent · Open access · Not an official university page
What would you like to check?
Explore the current record by topic
Exams & In-Person Assessment
Faculty Report: Assessment
The Faculty of Law report discusses rethinking assessment to require students to demonstrate higher-order learning outcomes across varied tasks and conditions.
AI Disclosure & Declarations
International Practice Discussed
The Faculty of Law report discusses an international practice of declaring AI use in a statement above the references; the excerpt does not establish a university-wide requirement.
Privacy & Data Protection
Governance Discussion
The retained Faculty of Law report discusses governance procedures for ethical academic and educational AI use; it does not establish a university-wide data-entry rule in this excerpt.
Approved AI Tools
Academic Utility Scenarios
Generative AI tools are recognized for academic assistance in drafting, summarization, debate preparation, and translation under explicit human oversight.
Research & Authorship
Academic Benchmark
The FDUSP report discusses international publication standards, emphasizing author accountability for submitted texts; formal university-wide research authorship regulations remain an unverified gap.
More reviewed record topics
Academic Integrity
International Reference
The FDUSP committee report discusses how other universities treat unauthorized AI use under plagiarism rules; formal USP central committee investigation and appeal procedures remain an unverified gap.
Teaching Practice
Responsible Teaching Reform
Faculty recommendations encourage teachers to reform pedagogical approaches, incorporating AI responsibly while establishing clear course-level boundaries.
Security & Procurement
Pending Verification
University-wide commercial AI procurement contracts and institutional software evaluation frameworks were not verified in local crawl extractions.
Before you submit
Do
- Consider transparency and AI literacy when using AI in academic work.
- Consider disclosing AI assistance in academic work; the faculty report discusses disclosure practices at other institutions.
Don’t
- Do not submit uncredited AI-generated text as your own independent work.
- Protect confidential and personal information when considering any AI tool.
Tool discovery records: scope pending review
Tool discovery information and cited sources are retained. Current account eligibility, cost, endorsement and assessment permission are not confirmed.
Record updates
Updates to this site's reviewed record, not confirmation that the university changed its policy.
Records cover only part of this period, starting 2026-10-28.
Other records · Page update
View revision
Loading revision…
Reviewed claims
4
Academic Integrity 1 reviewed claim
The FDUSP report says lack of transparency about student use of generative AI in faculty academic work points to a need for faculty actions promoting awareness and rules or guidelines for transparent and ethical use.
Reviewed
Last checked
Original evidence
Evidence 1Essa falta de transparência é preocupante, por dificultar processos internos de revisão e correção dos trabalhos e atividades acadêmicas. Esse fato, aliado a dúvidas quanto à legitimidade e à legalidade do uso, apontam para a necessidade de ações pela faculdade para promover a conscientização e a criação de regras e diretrizes que promovam a transparência e o uso ético das IAGs.Localized display only
The report says transparency gaps in faculty academic work create a need for faculty actions, awareness, and rules or guidelines for transparent and ethical IAG use.
Evidence locator: Executive summary
Teaching 1 reviewed claim
A FDUSP generative AI governance report recommends mitigation measures including training and disclosure, review of generated content, transparency about use, and avoiding prompts containing personal data.
Reviewed
Last checked
Original evidence
Evidence 1A forma de mitigar tais riscos está na adoção de medidas de governança, por meio de (i) treinamento e divulgação para esclarecimento quanto aos usos adequados e inadequados da ferramenta; (ii) revisão do conteúdo gerado, de forma a garantir sua acurácia e mitigar a presença de vieses discriminatórios; (iii) transparência em seu uso; e (iv) evitar requisições que contenham dados pessoaisLocalized display only
The report frames mitigation as governance measures: training/disclosure, review of generated content, transparency about use, and avoiding prompts with personal data.
Evidence locator: Executive summary
AI tool use 1 reviewed claim
An ABCD-USP article says USP's direction includes ethics and integrity formation, writing development, and broader use of plagiarism/similarity platforms such as Turnitin and Crossref Similarity Check iThenticate, which the article says USP has subscribed to since 2016 through ABCD-USP.
Reviewed
Last checked
Original evidence
Evidence 1O caminho na Universidade de São Paulo já tem uma direção e ela passa pela formação dos estudantes com ênfase na ética e na integridade, investimento no aprimoramento da escrita e redação científica e acadêmica, ampliação do uso de plataformas de prevenção de plágio como o Turnitin por docentes em conjunto com as bibliotecas... Ambas as ferramentas são assinadas pela USP desde 2016 por meio da Agência de Bibliotecas e Coleções Digitais (ABCD-USP).Localized display only
ABCD-USP describes an ethics/integrity and writing-development direction and says USP subscribes to Turnitin and iThenticate through ABCD-USP.
Evidence locator: Article body near closing section
Source Status 1 reviewed claim
An IEA-USP report says a USP seminar initiated debates for proposals to be sent to the USP Rector's Office so it could define guidelines and norms for appropriate and ethical use of tools such as ChatGPT in teaching and research.
Reviewed
Last checked
Original evidence
Evidence 1O seminário deu início a uma série de debates para a elaboração de propostas a serem encaminhadas à Reitoria da USP, para que esta defina um conjunto de diretrizes e normas que asseguram o uso adequado e ético de ferramentas como ChatGPT no ensino e na pesquisa.Localized display only
IEA-USP says the seminar began debates for proposals to the USP Rector's Office about guidelines and norms for appropriate and ethical use of ChatGPT-like tools.
Evidence locator: Article body, seminar overview
Official sources
4 official URLs; 4 source attributions and their captured versions retained.
Governança de Inteligência Artificial Generativa nas Universidades
direito.usp.br
University official source
direito.usp.br
Hash and captured version
Governança de Inteligência Artificial Generativa nas Universidades · 2026-05-14T04:39:10.000Z
Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.
c57e715622df09a69f52d7588b24411ccb7c4d71f91a4db50642b2f39e8f27d4
Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.
O efeito ChatGPT baseado em Inteligência Artificial e o ensino nas Universidades
www.abcd.usp.br
University official source
abcd.usp.br
Hash and captured version
O efeito ChatGPT baseado em Inteligência Artificial e o ensino nas Universidades · 2026-05-14T04:38:10.000Z
Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.
0d1321dfe15666b97445d1f13b9cc9194659a463f48d657d1b4802e4430a611f
Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.
Os desafios do ChatGPT ao ensino e à pesquisa
www.iea.usp.br
University official source
iea.usp.br
Hash and captured version
Os desafios do ChatGPT ao ensino e à pesquisa · 2026-05-14T04:38:20.000Z
Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.
fde9ec3256b26d3fa533e135addde7f6790662fa4f643f27fa30f97a65d75f08
Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.
Relatório traz procedimentos de governança para uso de Inteligência Artificial para fins acadêmicos e educacionais
direito.usp.br
University official source
direito.usp.br
Hash and captured version
Relatório traz procedimentos de governança para uso de Inteligência Artificial para fins acadêmicos e educacionais · 2026-05-14T04:38:00.000Z
Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.
ac6d1d0c4aaae6fcb1d114ea5977edf022f51b37e734bc596e82c47c58abebb3
Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.
Explore
Related university AI policy records
4 records
Record information, JSON & citation
Review layers: claim review applies to the claims only. Analysis is a separate machine-generated summary awaiting review. Coverage scores do not establish complete policy knowledge.
- Claim review state
- agent_reviewed
- Analysis review state
- machine_candidate
- Record revision
- v6-qs101-120-presentation-20261028
- Dataset release
- public-release-20260924-002
- Correction published
- Student snapshot
- Not published
Published V6 presentation; JSON and MCP retain the existing public record. Supplementary quotations and scope notes remain pending review. Local candidate corrections, tools and student summaries are not approved for publication. Institution-wide audit remains PARTIAL.
- Formal investigation workflows, sanction outcome schedules, and appeal procedures under USP/FDUSP regulations are not fully evidenced by the academic integrity report excerpt.
Questions students ask
Questions students ask
Can I use AI for my coursework?
The Faculty of Law report discusses the importance of transparency and AI literacy for students and teachers in light of international practices.
View evidence →Do I need to disclose AI use?
The Faculty of Law report discusses an international practice of declaring AI use in a statement above the references; the excerpt does not establish a university-wide requirement.
View evidence →Can I upload sensitive data?
The retained Faculty of Law report discusses governance procedures for ethical academic and educational AI use; it does not establish a university-wide data-entry rule in this excerpt.
View evidence →Which tools can I access?
Generative AI tools are recognized for academic assistance in drafting, summarization, debate preparation, and translation under explicit human oversight.
View evidence →What are the examination rules?
The Faculty of Law report discusses rethinking assessment to require students to demonstrate higher-order learning outcomes across varied tasks and conditions.
View evidence →What rules apply to research and publication?
The FDUSP report discusses international publication standards, emphasizing author accountability for submitted texts; formal university-wide research authorship regulations remain an unverified gap.
View evidence →What counts as academic misconduct?
The FDUSP committee report discusses how other universities treat unauthorized AI use under plagiarism rules; formal USP central committee investigation and appeal procedures remain an unverified gap.
View evidence →What guidance applies to teaching?
Faculty recommendations encourage teachers to reform pedagogical approaches, incorporating AI responsibly while establishing clear course-level boundaries.
View evidence →What security and procurement requirements apply?
University-wide commercial AI procurement contracts and institutional software evaluation frameworks were not verified in local crawl extractions.
View evidence →