Arkansas Tech University.
- Detection status
- No campus-wide AI-text detector is named on ATU's own pages — Turnitin runs through Blackboard without any AI-writing feature named; the Nursing Department alone documents screening assignments "for AI usage," without naming a tool
- Office in these sources
- Office of the Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs (Dr. Adolfo Santos) · 479-968-0319 · asantos@atu.edu
- Ombuds or advocacy office
- None located on the institution's own pages in this review.
- Sources last checked
- Oct 4, 2026
Reproduced from the institution's own pages quoted below — potentially relevant official sources, not a determination of which one governs any case.
These are potentially relevant official sources, not a determination of which one governs any case — course syllabi set a course-level Generative AI policy within University guidelines, and an individual college or department may publish further rules. Confirm applicability with the institution. Any dates are quoted from the sources, not a deadline calculation performed for you.
No AI-writing detector is named campus-wide on ATU's own pages
A named-vendor sweep (Turnitin AI writing indicator, SimCheck, Originality, Copyleaks, iThenticate, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Packback, Grammarly Authorship, Honorlock, Proctorio, Respondus, Examity) and a category sweep (the Office of Information Systems' course-management-systems page, the Tech Library's AI and plagiarism guides, the University's dedicated AI hub, the Code of Academic Integrity, and the Nursing Department's 2025-2026 Student Handbook) across atu.edu found Turnitin and Respondus confirmed as Blackboard-integrated tools, with no AI-writing-specific feature of either named anywhere, and one program-specific AI-usage screening practice, unnamed as to mechanism.
The Office of Information Systems' own Course Management Systems page (retrieved Oct 4, 2026) lists Turnitin only among a set of Blackboard-integrated tools: "TurnItIn, Respondus, Kaltura, Qwickly, and WebEx among others." No AI-writing-detection feature of Turnitin, and no feature of Respondus beyond its published role as a lockdown-browser/proctoring tool, is named on this or any other atu.edu page found in this sweep. Source: Course Management Systems — Office of Information Systems.
The Nursing Department's 2025-2026 Undergraduate Student Handbook (retrieved Oct 4, 2026) is the one place on atu.edu that documents an active screening practice, and it is explicit about its own scope: "Within the nursing department, assignments may be screened for AI usage. If AI generation is detected and the student does not disclose and cite the use of AI, then the assignment is subject to the academic integrity policy regarding violations of fabrication and forgery for the unauthorized use of generative AI to produce coursework." The Handbook does not name the tool or method used to screen assignments. Source: Nursing Department Undergraduate Student Handbook 2025-2026 (PDF). This is a Nursing-program-specific practice and is not read as describing a campus-wide deployment.
ATU's own "AI Guiding Principles" (version dated Mar 2, 2026; retrieved Oct 4, 2026) — the University's broadest first-party AI document, covering teaching, learning, research and operations — lists academic integrity among the institutional values AI use must uphold and states "The same policies that govern traditional work apply here." It separately states that "AI will not be the final decision-maker for admissions, financial aid, grading, discipline, employment actions, promotion/tenure, access to services, or other consequential outcomes," but names no detection tool anywhere in its text. Source: ATU AI Guiding Principles (PDF). NOT DISQUALIFIED: an empty inventory campus-wide, not a documented deactivation — no ATU page states that a detector was ever adopted, piloted, or disabled.
What the Code of Academic Integrity says about how cases proceed
- Who may be present
- Not stated in the sources reviewed. The Code of Academic Integrity (approved by the ATU Board of Trustees Aug 15, 2019) describes only a meeting between the student and "the instructor (or Department Head or Dean, if necessary)," conducted "either face-to-face, by conference call or using other electronic means"; it names no right to bring an advisor, support person, or other individual, and does not address recording.
- What follows on the record
- Not stated in the sources reviewed. The Code states that a required academic-integrity training "is to be completed within two business weeks of notification," and that "[f]ailure to complete the course in this timely fashion may result in a hold being placed on the individual's account by the Registrars," removed once training is complete — but no transcript-notation symbol, retention period, or third-party disclosure rule for an academic-integrity finding is stated anywhere in the Code or the Student Handbook materials reviewed.
The two questions an adviser raises first, answered from this institution's own published documents — or recorded as not stated in them.
The Code of Academic Integrity (approved by the ATU Board of Trustees Aug 15, 2019; retrieved Oct 4, 2026) sets the reporting threshold and timeline:
No provision of the Code states an evidentiary standard such as preponderance of the evidence; the reporting threshold quoted above ("compelling facts and evidence") is the only standard-of-proof language the Code contains, and it describes what triggers a report rather than how the Committee decides one. On sanctions, "Arkansas Tech University respects the right of the instructor of record for the course to determine and apply all academic sanctions," which "can include, but are not limited to giving an 'F' on a particular quiz or exam, giving an 'F' on a term paper or other written work, or giving the student an 'F' or 'W' for the course." Separately, "Academic Affairs may also apply additional institutional penalties" on an escalating rubric: training (and possibly probation or suspension) on a first offense, training plus probation (and possibly suspension or expulsion) on a second, a suspension floor on a third, and expulsion on a fourth. Source: Code of Academic Integrity (PDF). What these quotations mean for any particular case is for the institution and its process to determine.
Where the documents live
| Document | Location |
|---|---|
| Course Management Systems (Office of Information Systems; Turnitin/Respondus listed, no AI feature named) | ois.atu.edu — Course Management Systems |
| Nursing Department Undergraduate Student Handbook 2025-2026 (program-specific AI-usage screening) | atu.edu — Nursing Student Handbook (PDF) |
| ATU AI Guiding Principles (university-wide AI governance; no detector named) | atu.edu — AI Guiding Principles (PDF) |
| Generative AI Tools in Coursework — Suggested Course Syllabus Statements (instructor-facing models) | atu.edu — Syllabus Language for Generative AI Tools (PDF) |
| Code of Academic Integrity (procedure, sanctions, no stated evidentiary standard or accompaniment right) | atu.edu — Code of Academic Integrity (PDF) |
| Academic Integrity at ATU (office contact) | atu.edu — Academic Integrity |
Organizing your own drafts and records to bring to any of this: the records checklist. Capturing the pages above as they read today, and keeping your own dated record beside them: what to do with these sources.
Revision history of this page
2026-10-04 — Page created. Cold build; no prior CANDIDATES.md or procedure-facts.json research to reuse. Named-vendor sweep (Turnitin AI writing indicator, SimCheck, Originality, Copyleaks, iThenticate, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Packback, Grammarly Authorship, Honorlock, Proctorio, Respondus, Examity) and category sweep (the Office of Information Systems' course-management-systems page, the Tech Library's AI and plagiarism research guides, the University's dedicated AI hub at atu.edu/ai/, the Code of Academic Integrity, and the Nursing Department's 2025-2026 Student Handbook) found Turnitin and Respondus confirmed as Blackboard-integrated tools with no AI-writing feature of either named campus-wide, and one program-specific AI-usage screening practice (Nursing Department) that names no tool or mechanism. NOT DISQUALIFIED: empty inventory, not a documented deactivation. SCOPE DISCIPLINE: the Nursing Department's screening statement is quoted and labeled as program-specific throughout rather than generalized to the whole University, consistent with this collection's practice for course- or program-scoped findings. THREE SEPARATE AI DOCUMENTS, ALL READ: the University's current generative-AI guidance for coursework lives in three distinct first-party documents rather than one — the "AI Guiding Principles" (version dated Mar 2, 2026, the broadest, covering teaching/research/operations institution-wide and explicitly limiting AI from being "the final decision-maker for … discipline"), the "Generative AI Tools in Coursework" suggested-syllabus-language document (undated on its own face; three named models — Open Use, Moderate Use, Strict Use — left to instructor selection per course), and the Nursing Handbook's own, narrower "Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy" section; none of the three names a detection tool. CODE PREDATES GENERATIVE AI: the governing Code of Academic Integrity, despite a filename reading "Updated," carries no revision date beyond its original Aug 15, 2019 Board of Trustees approval and mentions neither AI nor Turnitin anywhere in its text; its procedure (reporting, the five/three-business-day meeting and appeal windows, the Academic Appeals Committee, the four-tier institutional-penalty rubric) is the one this page describes, on the reasoning that it remains the operative general-misconduct procedure and nothing first-party supersedes it for non-Nursing cases. ABSENCES RECORDED, NOT INFERRED: no evidentiary standard, no general right to an advisor or support person, no recording provision, and no transcript-notation or retention-period language appears anywhere in the Code or in the Student Handbook materials reviewed — each stated as an absence rather than assumed from the separate, non-academic Student Conduct process (Department of Student Conduct; cross-referenced by the Code only for disruptive-classroom-behavior referrals, not academic-integrity cases, and not quoted here as if it were the same process). OFFICE: the Academic Integrity page's own listed contact is the Provost's office itself — Dr. Adolfo Santos, Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs and Provost, 479-968-0319, asantos@atu.edu — used as published rather than substituting a general switchboard. OMBUDS/ADVOCACY CHECKED AND NOT FOUND: no office titled ombudsperson, ombudsman, or student advocate was located anywhere on atu.edu; the Division of Student Affairs (Dean of Students, Assistant Dean for Student Conduct) runs the separate non-academic conduct process and is not described as independent, confidential, or neutral, so it is not substituted for an ombuds. Nothing paraphrase-pending. Archive captures pending — not requested this pass (unattended scheduled run). Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-10-04).
2026-10-06 — Internet Archive captures requested on 2026-10-05 by an automated capture pass and recorded this date; no human review is claimed for this entry. No quotation, date, finding or link above was changed by it. Each capture below was requested through Save Page Now and then confirmed to play back. Captures added: Course Management Systems — Office of Information Systems → https://web.archive.org/web/20261005122822/https://ois.atu.edu/course-management-systems/; atu.edu — Academic Integrity → https://web.archive.org/web/20261005122935/https://www.atu.edu/academic-integrity/; Code of Academic Integrity → https://web.archive.org/web/20261005123011/https://www.atu.edu/academic-integrity/docs/Code%20of%20Academic%20Integrity%20Updated.pdf; ATU AI Guiding Principles → https://web.archive.org/web/20261005123028/https://www.atu.edu/ai/docs/AI%20Principles%20with%20Agentic%203_2_26.pdf; atu.edu — Syllabus Language for Generative AI Tools (PDF) → https://web.archive.org/web/20261005123048/https://www.atu.edu/ai/docs/Syllabus%20Language%20for%20Generative%20AI%20Tools.pdf; Nursing Department Undergraduate Student Handbook 2025-2026 → https://web.archive.org/web/20261005123107/https://www.atu.edu/ceh/nursing/2025-2026%20Student%20Handbook.pdf.
Spot an error or an outdated quotation? hello@gatheredwork.com — corrections are made on the record, in this log.