Policy presence
University of Plymouth has 3 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Plymouth, United Kingdom
University of Plymouth
University of Plymouth has 3 source-backed AI policy claims from 1 official source attribution. Review state: agent reviewed; 3 reviewed claims. Last checked May 17, 2026.
University of Plymouth AI policy short answer
v1 public contract
University of Plymouth has 3 source-backed AI policy claims from 1 official source attribution, including 3 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: University of Plymouth is listed as QS 2026 rank =613.
Citation-ready summary
As of this public record, University AI Policy Tracker lists University of Plymouth as an agent-reviewed AI policy record last checked on May 17, 2026 and last changed on May 17, 2026. The record contains 3 source-backed claims, including 3 reviewed claims, from 1 official source attribution. Original-language evidence snippets and source URLs remain canonical, with public JSON available at https://eduaipolicy.org/api/public/v1/universities/university-of-plymouth.json. The entity-level confidence is 91%. 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 Academic integrity claims.
- Evidence includes AI tool treatment claims.
- Named AI services detected in public claims: ChatGPT.
- 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
No source-backed public claim about AI disclosure or acknowledgement is present in this profile.
The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about disclosing, acknowledging, citing, or declaring AI use.
Coursework
University of Plymouth has 2 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Exams
University of Plymouth has 3 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Privacy and data entry
No source-backed public claim about privacy or data-entry restrictions is present in this profile.
The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about personal, confidential, sensitive, regulated, or student data entry into AI tools.
Academic integrity
University of Plymouth has 2 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Approved tools
University of Plymouth has 1 source-backed public claim for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Named AI services
University of Plymouth has 3 source-backed public claims for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Teaching guidance
University of Plymouth has 3 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
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.
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
3 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Academic Integrity
University of Plymouth Faculty of Science and Engineering guidance says AI tools such as ChatGPT should generally not be used to generate the final version of assessed work, unless the coursework briefing clearly states an exception.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: faculty_science_engineering_ai_final_submission_general_restriction
Original evidence
Evidence 1In general, AI tools such as ChatGPT should not be used in generating the final version of your work for submission. Any exceptions to this will be clearly stated in the coursework briefing.
Academic Integrity
University of Plymouth Faculty of Science and Engineering guidance states that using ChatGPT or similar AI tools to generate assessed work for submission is considered plagiarism and a breach of the university's academic offences regulations.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: faculty_science_engineering_ai_generated_assessed_work_plagiarism
Original evidence
Evidence 1Utilizing ChatGPT or similar AI tools to generate the assessed work that you submit is considered plagiarism and a breach of our university's academic offences regulations. Such practices can result in disciplinary action, up to and including a requirement to withdraw from the university.
Ai Tool Treatment
University of Plymouth Faculty of Science and Engineering guidance describes limited AI uses such as brainstorming, planning, structuring work, proofreading, checking typos, generating example code, and exploring how code works.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: faculty_science_engineering_limited_planning_and_support_uses
Original evidence
Evidence 1AI tools can be valuable for helping set out the parameters of arguments and providing examples of how to structure different pieces of work; AI can also be used to generate example code and also explore how other people's code works; AI can be used for proof-reading and checking for typos.
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
1 source attribution
Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Assessments
ecm-academics.plymouth.ac.uk
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.