Toronto, Canada Last checked

University of Toronto

Independent · Open access · Not an official university page

What would you like to check?

Search universities

Explore the current record by topic

Coursework

Marked work: instructor decides

Marked work: if an instructor says no outside assistance is permitted, using generative AI is typically treated as an unauthorized aid under the Code; instructors are asked to state their rules in the syllabus. Separately, students may generally use AI as a learning aid (to summarize or test understanding) even when a course bans AI for assignments, and such study use usually need not be disclosed.

Official source ↗

Exams

Unauthorized aids prohibited

Using or possessing an unauthorized aid in any academic work, including tests and exams, is an offence under the 2025 Code. No general exam permission for AI exists; follow each assessment's instructions.

Official source ↗

Disclosure

Cite when content is used

Learning-aid use typically does not need to be cited or disclosed, but if you use AI-generated information that would normally need citation (quoting, paraphrasing, reproducing ideas), cite it per U of T Libraries guidance or your instructor. Doctoral theses must clearly describe and cite any approved AI use (which tools, how and why).

Official source ↗

Privacy & sensitive data

Check data level and approval

Before sharing personal information or Level 2-4 university data with any AI tool, verify it has been assessed for that level; AI Kitchen tools are approved up to Level 3 (the Model Comparison Tool only to Level 2). Without the instructor's explicit permission, students may not upload course materials (slides, recordings, test questions, rubrics) to an AI tool not approved for that purpose. Instructors using unvetted third-party AI tools must let students opt out with a viable alternative, and a Privacy Impact Assessment is required when personal information is collected.

Official source ↗

Institutional tools

Audience varies by tool

Students can use Microsoft Copilot Chat (free, U of T login) and Cogniti agents that instructors enable in Quercus. Claude for Education (free, limited seats), ChatGPT Edu (negotiated pricing, limited seats), M365 Copilot, Teams Premium, GitHub Copilot Business and Azure AI Foundry are for staff, faculty and librarians. Three U of T-built AIK services are Coming Soon. Library features such as Scopus AI and Web of Science Research Assistant, and Contact North tools, are listed by UTSC. Access does not authorize use in an assessment.

Official source ↗

Research & publication

Doctoral thesis: prior approval

Any AI use in researching or writing a doctoral thesis requires prior approval from the supervisor(s) and supervisory committee, and approval for research does not cover writing. For other graduate milestones SGS recommends documented advance approval; master's theses, MRPs and comprehensive exams are governed by graduate units. Unauthorized AI use may be an academic offence or research misconduct.

Official source ↗
More reviewed record topics

Academic integrity & procedures

Code procedures apply

The 2025 Code also covers knowingly submitting concocted facts or references. An instructor with reasonable grounds must tell the student and invite a discussion (what the student says there cannot be used at a hearing); at the dean's meeting students may seek advice or representation and are not obliged to make statements. Divisional sanctions go up to 12 months' suspension (24 with Provost approval); longer suspension or a recommendation of expulsion is for the University Tribunal. U of T does not support AI-detection software on student work.

Official source ↗

Teaching & course guidance

Recommended

The University of Toronto recommends (not mandates) that instructors include a syllabus statement informing students of their expectations on AI use, and provides sample statements for undergraduate and graduate course syllabi and assignments. U of T does not support using AI-detection software on student work because none has been found sufficiently reliable, they are known to incorrectly flag human-written content, and sharing student work without permission raises privacy and ethical concerns. Instructors are encouraged to use traditional detection methods instead, such as meeting in person with students to discuss their work.

Official source ↗

Security & procurement

Review required

Before sharing personal information or Level 2–4 university data with any AI tool, users must verify that the tool has been assessed by the university as suitable for that classification level. Central AI Kitchen tools are approved up to Level 3 (Model Comparison Tool only up to Level 2). When instructors use unvetted third-party AI tools in courses, students must be provided a viable opt-out alternative, and a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) is required wherever personal information is collected.

Official source ↗

Before you submit

Do

  • Check each assessment's instructions: if no outside assistance is allowed, AI counts as an unauthorized aid.
    Requirement in this scope
  • Cite AI-generated wording, ideas or information you use, following U of T Libraries guidance or your instructor.
    Requirement in this scope
  • Doctoral students: get prior approval from your supervisor and committee for any AI use in thesis research, and separately for writing.
    Requirement in this scope

Don’t

  • Do not upload instructor or University course materials to an AI tool not approved for that purpose without explicit permission.
    Requirement in this scope
  • Do not share personal information or Level 2-4 data with an AI tool that has not been assessed for that level.
    Requirement in this scope
  • Do not submit AI-generated facts or references without checking them; concocted references are an offence under the Code.
    Requirement in this scope

AI use questioned?

University of Toronto

University of Toronto Code of Behaviour on Academic Matters (effective July 1, 2025); Vice-Provost Teaching & Learning generative AI FAQ (October 2026); School of Graduate Studies AI guidance (September 2026); CTSI and AI Kitchen tool information; Information Security guidelines; UTSC CTL tool list. Institution audit remains PARTIAL.

Investigation & response

The 2025 Code of Behaviour on Academic Matters also makes it an offence knowingly to submit academic work containing a purported statement of fact or reference to a source that has been concocted (an offence depending on knowledge, including where the student ought reasonably to have known; not every AI error is automatically an offence). When an instructor has reasonable grounds to believe an offence was committed, they must inform the student immediately, give reasons and invite a discussion, normally held synchronously; nothing the student says in that discussion may be used in evidence at a hearing. The dean or chair must tell the student they may seek advice or be represented and are not obliged to make any statement. Sanctions available at divisional level include up to 12 months' suspension (up to 24 with Provost approval); suspension of up to five years or a recommendation of expulsion are for the University Tribunal.

Original evidence and scope

The 2025 Code of Behaviour on Academic Matters also makes it an offence knowingly to submit academic work containing a purported statement of fact or reference to a source that has been concocted (an offence depending on knowledge, including where the student ought reasonably to have known; not every AI error is automatically an offence). When an instructor has reasonable grounds to believe an offence was committed, they must inform the student immediately, give reasons and invite a discussion, normally held synchronously; nothing the student says in that discussion may be used in evidence at a hearing. The dean or chair must tell the student they may seek advice or be represented and are not obliged to make any statement. Sanctions available at divisional level include up to 12 months' suspension (up to 24 with Provost approval); suspension of up to five years or a recommendation of expulsion are for the University Tribunal.

draft-claim-uoft-code-fabricated-references-procedure
to submit any academic work containing a purported statement of fact or reference to a source which has been concocted.

Code s.4(f) (Offences); lines 573-573 of captured page text

Official university source ↗
Wherever in this Code an offence is described as depending on "knowing", the offence shall likewise be deemed to have been committed if the person ought reasonably to have known.

Code s.2 (knowing); lines 559-559 of captured page text

Official university source ↗
Where an instructor has reasonable grounds to believe that an academic offence has been committed by a student, the instructor shall so inform the student immediately after learning of the act or conduct complained of, giving reasons, and invite the student to discuss the matter. Normally such discussions are held synchronously, in person or virtually. Nothing the student says in such a discussion may be used or receivable in evidence against the student in the hearing of any charge with respect to the alleged offence in question.

Divisional procedures: instructor's duties; lines 623-623 of captured page text

Official university source ↗
shall inform the student that they are entitled to seek advice, or to be represented by counsel at the meeting, before making, and are not obliged to make, any statement or admission

Divisional procedures: dean's or chair's warning; lines 663-663 of captured page text

Official university source ↗
suspension from attendance in a course or courses, a program, an academic division or unit, or the University for a period of not more than twelve months.

Divisional sanctions; lines 751-751 of captured page text

Official university source ↗
recommendation of expulsion from the University. The Tribunal has power only to recommend that such a penalty be imposed.

Tribunal sanctions; lines 945-945 of captured page text

Official university source ↗

Possible outcomes

The 2025 Code of Behaviour on Academic Matters also makes it an offence knowingly to submit academic work containing a purported statement of fact or reference to a source that has been concocted (an offence depending on knowledge, including where the student ought reasonably to have known; not every AI error is automatically an offence). When an instructor has reasonable grounds to believe an offence was committed, they must inform the student immediately, give reasons and invite a discussion, normally held synchronously; nothing the student says in that discussion may be used in evidence at a hearing. The dean or chair must tell the student they may seek advice or be represented and are not obliged to make any statement. Sanctions available at divisional level include up to 12 months' suspension (up to 24 with Provost approval); suspension of up to five years or a recommendation of expulsion are for the University Tribunal.

Original evidence and scope

The 2025 Code of Behaviour on Academic Matters also makes it an offence knowingly to submit academic work containing a purported statement of fact or reference to a source that has been concocted (an offence depending on knowledge, including where the student ought reasonably to have known; not every AI error is automatically an offence). When an instructor has reasonable grounds to believe an offence was committed, they must inform the student immediately, give reasons and invite a discussion, normally held synchronously; nothing the student says in that discussion may be used in evidence at a hearing. The dean or chair must tell the student they may seek advice or be represented and are not obliged to make any statement. Sanctions available at divisional level include up to 12 months' suspension (up to 24 with Provost approval); suspension of up to five years or a recommendation of expulsion are for the University Tribunal.

draft-claim-uoft-code-fabricated-references-procedure
to submit any academic work containing a purported statement of fact or reference to a source which has been concocted.

Code s.4(f) (Offences); lines 573-573 of captured page text

Official university source ↗
Wherever in this Code an offence is described as depending on "knowing", the offence shall likewise be deemed to have been committed if the person ought reasonably to have known.

Code s.2 (knowing); lines 559-559 of captured page text

Official university source ↗
Where an instructor has reasonable grounds to believe that an academic offence has been committed by a student, the instructor shall so inform the student immediately after learning of the act or conduct complained of, giving reasons, and invite the student to discuss the matter. Normally such discussions are held synchronously, in person or virtually. Nothing the student says in such a discussion may be used or receivable in evidence against the student in the hearing of any charge with respect to the alleged offence in question.

Divisional procedures: instructor's duties; lines 623-623 of captured page text

Official university source ↗
shall inform the student that they are entitled to seek advice, or to be represented by counsel at the meeting, before making, and are not obliged to make, any statement or admission

Divisional procedures: dean's or chair's warning; lines 663-663 of captured page text

Official university source ↗
suspension from attendance in a course or courses, a program, an academic division or unit, or the University for a period of not more than twelve months.

Divisional sanctions; lines 751-751 of captured page text

Official university source ↗
recommendation of expulsion from the University. The Tribunal has power only to recommend that such a penalty be imposed.

Tribunal sanctions; lines 945-945 of captured page text

Official university source ↗

Review & appeal

The current evidence does not include a verified specific procedure or deadline. Check the applicable university rules.

AI tools & access

  • ChatGPT Edu (OpenAI)Institutional access / licenceConditions apply

    Learn more via the Knowledge Base and submit a request through the IT Service Centre.

  • Claude for Education (Anthropic)Institutional access / licenceConditions apply

    Learn more via the Knowledge Base and submit a request through the IT Service Centre.

  • Microsoft Copilot ChatInstitutional access / licenceRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Sign in with your U of T account.

  • M365 CopilotInstitutional access / licenceConditions apply

    Learn more via the Knowledge Base and submit a request through the IT Service Centre.

  • Microsoft GitHub Copilot BusinessInstitutional access / licenceConditions apply

    Submit a request via the Knowledge Base and IT Service Centre.

  • CognitiInstitutional access / licenceConditions apply

    Instructors request the ability to create agents through the IT Service Centre; students access agents inside enabled Quercus courses.

  • Microsoft Teams PremiumInstitutional access / licenceConditions apply

    Submit a request through the IT Service Centre.

  • Microsoft Azure AI FoundryInstitutional access / licenceConditions apply

    Submit a request through the IT Service Centre.

  • AIK Model Comparison ToolUniversity-hosted serviceUnder review

    Not yet available (Coming Soon).

  • AIK Platform powered by CohereUniversity-hosted serviceUnder review

    Not yet available (Coming Soon).

  • AIK DevUniversity-hosted serviceUnder review

    Not yet available (Coming Soon).

  • Scopus AIInstitutional access / licenceRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Use within the Scopus database with UTORid login (library database access).

  • Web of Science Research AssistantInstitutional access / licenceRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Use within the Web of Science database with UTORid login (library database access).

  • Contact North AI Tutor ProThird-party serviceRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Publicly accessible; no UTORid required (per UTSC CTL).

  • Contact North AI Teacher's Assistant ProThird-party serviceRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Publicly accessible; no UTORid required (per UTSC CTL).

Record updatesLast 90 days · Recorded updates: 3

Updates to this site's reviewed record, not confirmation that the university changed its policy.

  1. Page update

    Other records · Page update

    View revision

    Loading revision…

  2. Record addition · Site correction

    Coursework · Exams · 6 more topics · Records involved: 25 (18 corrected / adjusted · 7 added)

    View revision

    Loading revision…

  3. Record addition

    Ai Tool Treatment · Records involved: 1 (1 added)

    View revision

    Loading revision…

Reviewed claims

25

Official sources

8 official URLs; 8 source attributions and their captured versions retained.

Code of Behaviour on Academic Matters (approved June 24, 2025; effective July 1, 2025)

governingcouncil.utoronto.ca

University official source

Governing Council, University of Toronto

Hash and captured version

Code of Behaviour on Academic Matters (approved June 24, 2025; effective July 1, 2025) · 2026-10-20T05:47:43Z

SHA-256 of the retained capture file bytes.

f30271f7de532f5e513371865d35ea248e44fae97884fa8b2c57a2743e4cc1f7

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Generative Artificial Intelligence in the Classroom: FAQs (updated October 2026)

www.vptl.utoronto.ca

University official source

Office of the Vice-Provost, Teaching & Learning, University of Toronto

Hash and captured version

Generative Artificial Intelligence in the Classroom: FAQs (updated October 2026) · 2026-10-20T05:31:54Z

SHA-256 of the retained capture file bytes.

c3f63de2bf0cef4a8766517dc27e4392a2aa0ca9813f94e5309dc076569eca06

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Using ChatGPT or other generative AI tool on a marked assessment (academic integrity scenario; cites pre-2025 Code numbering)

www.academicintegrity.utoronto.ca

University official source

Office of Academic Integrity, University of Toronto

Hash and captured version

Using ChatGPT or other generative AI tool on a marked assessment (academic integrity scenario; cites pre-2025 Code numbering) · 2026-10-20T05:31:56Z

SHA-256 of the retained capture file bytes.

6b438a2f77745a5b215c3be80e9f92a2c6d8c14631144704944784eb73cdd5f8

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Welcome to the AI Kitchen (AI tools directory)

ai.utoronto.ca

University official source

University of Toronto

Hash and captured version

Welcome to the AI Kitchen (AI tools directory) · 2026-10-20T05:31:55Z

SHA-256 of the retained capture file bytes.

3882ff0100cf4de6a87e1d532a2faaac5b377529df3a6c687e258e0e5e555eab

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

GenAI Tools for Teaching (CTSI)

teaching.utoronto.ca

University official source

Centre for Teaching Support & Innovation, University of Toronto

Hash and captured version

GenAI Tools for Teaching (CTSI) · 2026-10-20T05:31:55Z

SHA-256 of the retained capture file bytes.

47916cc6cc8fe89a59a15bf943c01d6346d5884663a901fef0107597824b6d15

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Generative AI Tools (UTSC Centre for Teaching and Learning)

www.utsc.utoronto.ca

University official source

University of Toronto Scarborough

Hash and captured version

Generative AI Tools (UTSC Centre for Teaching and Learning) · 2026-10-20T05:48:23Z

SHA-256 of the retained capture file bytes.

dcf70a6a12913fe2cd1ae208ee5e1d2122c07c861ad4da316055bbdac1d5ee20

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Guidance on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (SGS, last updated September 9, 2026)

www.sgs.utoronto.ca

University official source

School of Graduate Studies, University of Toronto

Hash and captured version

Guidance on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (SGS, last updated September 9, 2026) · 2026-10-20T05:31:54Z

SHA-256 of the retained capture file bytes.

a2ae561f30ec0955eb90aa0cb2728faaf9cacb215857e3b1ed906d060b8778cb

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Use AI intelligently (Information Security guidelines)

security.utoronto.ca

University official source

Information Security, University of Toronto

Hash and captured version

Use AI intelligently (Information Security guidelines) · 2026-10-20T05:31:56Z

SHA-256 of the retained capture file bytes.

25dfb97a0276e6c6219b08f60e6ed3587c7afe996bfeb1c08b90cab10a547969

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗
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
qs25-31-v6-r1-20261020
Dataset release
public-release-20260924-002
Correction published
Student snapshot
Not published
Current reviewed JSON · Historical baseline

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.

          Current reviewed JSON
          Questions students ask

          Questions students ask

          Can I use AI for my coursework?

          Marked work: if an instructor says no outside assistance is permitted, using generative AI is typically treated as an unauthorized aid under the Code; instructors are asked to state their rules in the syllabus. Separately, students may generally use AI as a learning aid (to summarize or test understanding) even when a course bans AI for assignments, and such study use usually need not be disclosed.

          View evidence →
          Do I need to disclose AI use?

          Learning-aid use typically does not need to be cited or disclosed, but if you use AI-generated information that would normally need citation (quoting, paraphrasing, reproducing ideas), cite it per U of T Libraries guidance or your instructor. Doctoral theses must clearly describe and cite any approved AI use (which tools, how and why).

          View evidence →
          Can I upload sensitive data?

          Before sharing personal information or Level 2-4 university data with any AI tool, verify it has been assessed for that level; AI Kitchen tools are approved up to Level 3 (the Model Comparison Tool only to Level 2). Without the instructor's explicit permission, students may not upload course materials (slides, recordings, test questions, rubrics) to an AI tool not approved for that purpose. Instructors using unvetted third-party AI tools must let students opt out with a viable alternative, and a Privacy Impact Assessment is required when personal information is collected.

          View evidence →
          Which tools can I access?

          Students can use Microsoft Copilot Chat (free, U of T login) and Cogniti agents that instructors enable in Quercus. Claude for Education (free, limited seats), ChatGPT Edu (negotiated pricing, limited seats), M365 Copilot, Teams Premium, GitHub Copilot Business and Azure AI Foundry are for staff, faculty and librarians. Three U of T-built AIK services are Coming Soon. Library features such as Scopus AI and Web of Science Research Assistant, and Contact North tools, are listed by UTSC. Access does not authorize use in an assessment.

          View evidence →
          What are the examination rules?

          Using or possessing an unauthorized aid in any academic work, including tests and exams, is an offence under the 2025 Code. No general exam permission for AI exists; follow each assessment's instructions.

          View evidence →
          What rules apply to research and publication?

          Any AI use in researching or writing a doctoral thesis requires prior approval from the supervisor(s) and supervisory committee, and approval for research does not cover writing. For other graduate milestones SGS recommends documented advance approval; master's theses, MRPs and comprehensive exams are governed by graduate units. Unauthorized AI use may be an academic offence or research misconduct.

          View evidence →
          What counts as academic misconduct?

          The 2025 Code also covers knowingly submitting concocted facts or references. An instructor with reasonable grounds must tell the student and invite a discussion (what the student says there cannot be used at a hearing); at the dean's meeting students may seek advice or representation and are not obliged to make statements. Divisional sanctions go up to 12 months' suspension (24 with Provost approval); longer suspension or a recommendation of expulsion is for the University Tribunal. U of T does not support AI-detection software on student work.

          View evidence →
          What guidance applies to teaching?

          The University of Toronto recommends (not mandates) that instructors include a syllabus statement informing students of their expectations on AI use, and provides sample statements for undergraduate and graduate course syllabi and assignments. U of T does not support using AI-detection software on student work because none has been found sufficiently reliable, they are known to incorrectly flag human-written content, and sharing student work without permission raises privacy and ethical concerns. Instructors are encouraged to use traditional detection methods instead, such as meeting in person with students to discuss their work.

          View evidence →
          What security and procurement requirements apply?

          Before sharing personal information or Level 2–4 university data with any AI tool, users must verify that the tool has been assessed by the university as suitable for that classification level. Central AI Kitchen tools are approved up to Level 3 (Model Comparison Tool only up to Level 2). When instructors use unvetted third-party AI tools in courses, students must be provided a viable opt-out alternative, and a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) is required wherever personal information is collected.

          View evidence →
          When was this record checked?

          Record checked:

          Record version →
          Which official sources support these rules?Official source →
          Where can I read the full evidence?

          25 · Full policy evidence

          Full policy evidence →
          University of Toronto AI Policy