Nottingham, United Kingdom

University of Nottingham

Record status

Policy statusReviewed evidence-backed recordReview: Agent reviewedClaim coverage7 reviewedEvidence-backed claims7Reviewed7Candidate0Official sources5Source languageen-GBPublic JSON/api/public/v1/universities/university-of-nottingham.json

Policy profile

Coverage score90/100Coverage labelbroad public coverageReview: Machine candidateAnalysis confidence79%

Privacy and data entry

University of Nottingham has 1 source-backed public claim for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: recommended.

RecommendedMachine candidateConfidence79%Evidence1Sources1

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

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.

Not MentionedMachine candidateConfidence0%Evidence0Sources0

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

Academic Integrity

The University of Nottingham Quality Manual includes unpermitted generative-AI-generated or AI-improved assessment work within false authorship.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence95%

Normalized value: unpermitted_genai_generated_or_improved_assessment_work_false_authorship

Original evidence

Evidence 1
False Authorship includes the submission of work that is generated and/or improved by software that is not permitted for that assessment. This may include the use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) software to produce text, images or data or other work (e.g., Copilot, ChatGPT, DeepSeek, BARD, Wordtune, Quillbot, DALL-E, chatbots and similar).

Localized display only

The Quality Manual includes unpermitted AI-generated or AI-improved assessment work within false authorship.

Ai Tool Treatment

University of Nottingham student guidance says AI use for assessed work is assessment-specific: module or assessment information should say whether AI use is essential, optional, or prohibited, and students should not assume permission.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence94%

Normalized value: assessment_specific_ai_use_essential_optional_prohibited_check_required

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Your module tutor and/or assessment documents should specify which uses of AI are essential, optional, and/or prohibited for each assessed piece of work. The information should also tell you how to acknowledge and provide evidence of any AI use. If you can't find this information, check with your module convenor. Do not make any assumptions about uses of AI in your assessments.

Localized display only

Nottingham says AI use is assessment-specific and students should not assume permission when guidance is absent.

Privacy

For study support outside assessments, University of Nottingham guidance recommends Microsoft Copilot with a Nottingham login and says logged-in Copilot will not record prompts, inputs, or uploads as training data.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence93%

Normalized value: microsoft_copilot_recommended_for_study_support_with_login_privacy_note

Original evidence

Evidence 1
When using generative AI to support your studies outside of your assessments, the university provides access to and recommends use of Microsoft Copilot, with your University of Nottingham login. When you are logged in, Copilot will not record your prompts, inputs, and uploads as training data. This is the best way to maintain privacy and data protection whilst using generative AI.

Localized display only

For study support outside assessment, Nottingham recommends logged-in Microsoft Copilot and says prompts, inputs and uploads are not recorded as training data.

Academic Integrity

For assessments where AI use is essential or optional, University of Nottingham guidance says acknowledgement expectations should come from module or assessment information and that students should keep records or chat logs of AI interactions.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence92%

Normalized value: allowed_ai_assessment_use_acknowledgement_and_records_expected

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Where use of AI in your assessed work is marked as essential or optional, information on how to acknowledge your use of AI should be included in your module handbook or assessment brief. Whenever you are interacting with generative AI, it is good practice to keep a full record or chat log of these interactions.

Localized display only

For essential or optional AI use, Nottingham says acknowledgement instructions should be in module or assessment information and recommends keeping chat logs.

Ai Tool Treatment

University of Nottingham says each assessment task will indicate whether use of generative AI is essential, optional, or prohibited.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence90%

Normalized value: University of Nottingham says each assessment task will indicate whether use of generative AI is essential, optional, or prohibited.

Original evidence

Evidence 1
You will be advised whether use of generative AI is essential, optional, or prohibited for each assessment task.

Academic Integrity

University of Nottingham equates prohibited generative AI use in an assessment task with false authorship.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence90%

Normalized value: University of Nottingham equates prohibited generative AI use in an assessment task with false authorship.

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Where use of generative AI is prohibited for an assessment task, the university equates use of these tools with false authorship.

Academic Integrity

University of Nottingham says students are responsible for checking per assessment whether AI use is essential, optional, or prohibited.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence90%

Normalized value: University of Nottingham says students are responsible for checking per assessment whether AI use is essential, optional, or prohibited.

Original evidence

Evidence 1
It is your responsibility to check on a per-assessment basis whether use of AI is essential, optional, or prohibited.

Candidate claims

0 machine or needs-review claim

Official sources

5 source attribution

Change log

Last checkedMay 23, 2026Last changedMay 23, 2026Open change log

Corrections

Back to universities