Gathered Work

Colorado State University Global.

Detection status
CSU Global's Appeals Center states "[i]nstructors receive a TurnItIn report that focuses on identifying possible AI content," which triggers human review before any action. A separate, more recently updated Student Help Center page instead names "CopyLeaks" for the same similarity-report function and does not mention AI — an unreconciled divergence between two CSU Global-published sources.
Office in these sources
Office of Student Affairs · 555 17th St., Suite 1000, Denver, CO 80202 · 866-734-5890 · student.affairs@csuglobal.edu
Ombuds or advocacy office
None located on the institution's own pages in this review.
Sources last checked
Oct 17, 2026
This record
Assembled from 7 linked documents on 3 hosts · change log below: 2 dated entries, Oct 17, 2026 · human review confirmed Oct 17, 2026 · the change record across every page · the collection in numbers

Reproduced from the institution's own pages quoted below — potentially relevant official sources, not a determination of which one governs any case.

Colorado State University Global's published sources on AI detection and academic integrity, quoted and linked below. These are potentially relevant official sources, not a determination of which one governs any case — CSU Global is entirely online, and its own AI policy notes that "[s]ome faculty can encourage the use of AI tools in the classroom," so course-level instructions are also a relevant source. Confirm applicability with the institution. Any dates are quoted from the sources, not a deadline calculation performed for you.

01Detection status

Two CSU Global sources name two different vendors for the same report, and only one names an AI capability

CSU Global's Appeals Center publishes a dedicated Plagiarism and AI page (no on-page date displayed; retrieved Oct 17, 2026) describing both functions together:

"As a general guideline, student assignments should return an originality check similarity score of 30% or less, with no more than 20% of the student's paper containing quoted material." "Students can submit work labeled as "Draft" in the grade book comments, this allows student's to review their TurnItIn score without their work being graded." "Instructors receive a TurnItIn report that focuses on identifying possible AI content. If the score is high then the instructor will review the work and either contact the student directly or ask the Student Affairs department to review the concern. While concerns are reviewed a "1" will be placed in the gradebook."

Source: Plagiarism and AI — CSU Global Appeals Center. This is first-party confirmation that an AI-content report is generated and reviewed by instructors before any action is taken; no further detail is given on what percentage counts as "high."

A separate CSU Global Student Help Center article (Last Modified 05/18/2026; retrieved Oct 17, 2026) — updated more recently than the Appeals Center page above — describes the same similarity-report workflow using a different vendor name and no AI reference:

"Plagiarism is typically identified using an online tool we use called CopyLeaks, which detects plagiarized material in submitted assignments and provides a similarity report showing the percentage of quoted material. Students' similarity score is expected to be 30% or less, with no more than 20% of the paper containing quoted material."

Source: Using the Similarity Report and Avoiding Plagiarism — CSU Global Student Help Center. Neither CSU Global page acknowledges the other or the discrepancy between "TurnItIn" and "CopyLeaks"; both are quoted here rather than one being silently preferred. Separately, CSU Global's Student Rights Policies document corroborates that some form of AI-content signal factors into grading: "student submissions are evaluated based on a combination of the originality score, the probability of AI-generated content, the requirements of the assignment, and the presence of original thought" (source below), consistent with the Appeals Center's description above regardless of which vendor currently supplies it.

On AI use itself, the Appeals Center's AI Policy states:

"[T]he unethical use of any artificial intelligence (AI) tool like Chat GPT, Claude, BingAI, Google Bard, or Chat Sonic, in the completion of submitted coursework is prohibited. An example of an unethical use includes using fully AI-generated content directly from an AI tool and claiming it as your own work in submission for a grade." "Student's are able to use tools that review their original work and provide recommendations to improve their work. Students are NOT able to submit work created by an AI tool for grading."

Source: Plagiarism and AI — CSU Global Appeals Center. A named-vendor sweep (Turnitin and its AI writing indicator, SimCheck, Originality, Copyleaks, iThenticate, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Packback, Grammarly Authorship, Honorlock, Proctorio, Respondus, Examity) found only the two named above, both confirmed first-party for the roles described; nothing recommends against either tool or states that AI detection has been disabled, so the institution is not disqualified under the step-2 check. A bounded sweep of the same pages, plus one additional site search, for a stated preference for process-based verification (draft review, an authorship interview, or similar) found nothing beyond the instructor-review step already quoted above.

02Published process

What CSU Global's own pages say about how cases proceed

Who may be present
Not stated in the sources reviewed: no CSU Global page names an advisor, attorney, or support person for a disciplinary hearing. What is stated: "[i]f a Code of Conduct Hearing is initiated... [t]he student will be invited to attend the hearing or provide a statement for the Panel to review." Recording of a hearing is not addressed in the sources reviewed. — Violations of Student Code of Conduct — CSU Global Appeals Center
What follows on the record
Sanctions are stated to run "including, but not limited to... [p]ermanent expulsion and/or degree revocation with permanent mark on transcript." Separately, CSU Global's Student Rights Policies document states more broadly that "[a]ny findings and official plagiarism offenses will be documented in the student's academic record" — not itself specified as a transcript notation short of expulsion or degree revocation. — Violations of Student Code of Conduct · Student Rights Policies

The two questions an adviser raises first, answered from this institution's own published documents — or recorded as not stated in them.

CSU Global's Student Rights Policies (no on-page revision date displayed; retrieved Oct 17, 2026) state that "[i]f a student is suspected of academic dishonesty, the instructor will inform the Office of Student Affairs or their designee prior to imposing an academic penalty," which "may include grading the work as is, resubmitting work or earning a failing grade." Beyond any academic penalty, "a report of the infraction must be submitted to the Provost, who may initiate additional disciplinary action," following the same Hearing and Appeal Process as other Student Conduct Code violations. That process uses "the preponderance of the evidence standard," and students found responsible "may be subject to disciplinary sanctions including, but not limited to: warning, loss of credit, disciplinary probation, suspension, permanent expulsion and/or degree revocation with permanent mark on transcript." Source: Student Rights Policies.

The Appeals Center's Violations of Student Code of Conduct page (retrieved Oct 17, 2026) describes the hearing itself: "[i]f a Code of Conduct Hearing is initiated, Student Affairs will set a meeting of the Disciplinary Panel," which gathers "all necessary information and documentation," provides it to the student, and invites the student "to attend the hearing or provide a statement for the Panel to review." "Student Affairs will send the Panel's recommendation for the Provost for approval" and then "notify the student of the outcome." A student may appeal "by submitting their request and documentation to the Provost within two (2) weeks of receipt of the decision for action," with a final decision due "[n]o later than three (3) weeks" after the Provost receives the appeal. Source: Violations of Student Code of Conduct. What these quotations mean for any particular case is for the institution and its process to determine; they are reproduced so you can read the originals in context.

03Source map

Where the documents live

DocumentLocation
Plagiarism and AI (Appeals Center)appeals.csuglobal.edu/academic-integrity/plagiarism-policy
Violations of Student Code of Conduct (Appeals Center)appeals.csuglobal.edu/academic-integrity/violations-of-student-code-of-conduct
Academic Dishonesty (Appeals Center)appeals.csuglobal.edu/academic-integrity/academic-dishonesty
Student Rights Policiescsuglobal.edu/student-policies/student-rights-policies
Using the Similarity Report and Avoiding Plagiarism (names CopyLeaks)csuglobalhelp.knowledgeowl.com — Using the Similarity Report
Academic Dishonesty (Student Help Center)csuglobalhelp.knowledgeowl.com/help/academic-dishonesty
Contact Us (Office of Student Affairs)appeals.csuglobal.edu/contact-us

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.

04Change log

Revision history of this page

2026-10-17 — Page created. Priority A tranche 4, entry 269. Cold build (no prior CANDIDATES.md/procedure-facts research). All quotations retrieved this date. The Student Help Center's "Using the Similarity Report and Avoiding Plagiarism" article carries its own "Last Modified on 05/18/2026"; the Appeals Center pages (appeals.csuglobal.edu) display no on-page revision date; the Student Rights Policies page on csuglobal.edu displays no on-page revision date either. Named-vendor sweep (Turnitin and its AI writing indicator specifically, SimCheck, Originality, Copyleaks, iThenticate, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Packback, Grammarly Authorship, Honorlock, Proctorio, Respondus, Examity) found both Turnitin (named "TurnItIn" on the Appeals Center) and Copyleaks (named on the Student Help Center), each described as the vendor behind the same originality/similarity-report function; nothing reconciles the two names, and the page quotes both rather than picking one. VENDOR DIVERGENCE IS THE PRINCIPAL FINDING: the Appeals Center's "Plagiarism and AI" page is the only page located that connects a named vendor ("TurnItIn") to an AI-content report specifically ("a TurnItIn report that focuses on identifying possible AI content"); the Student Help Center's more recently updated page describes the same report mechanics (30% similarity threshold, draft/final submission workflow) under "CopyLeaks" without mentioning AI at all. Both pages are CSU Global's own, both are current (neither superseded nor archived), and neither was captured via an unreliable or stale transport. DISQUALIFICATION CHECK: no page recommends against using either tool or states AI detection has been disabled; the Appeals Center page actively describes the AI-report workflow as in use. Not disqualified. CORROBORATION: the Student Rights Policies document's "probability of AI-generated content" clause, among four grading factors, is consistent with an AI-content signal being evaluated regardless of which vendor currently supplies it, and is quoted as corroboration rather than as its own detector finding. PROCESS-VERIFICATION SWEEP: the same pages, plus one additional site search, found nothing beyond the instructor-review step ("the instructor will review the work") already quoted in section 01; none-published at the scope searched. PROCESS: the Academic Dishonesty escalation (instructor-level penalty with Office of Student Affairs notified first, preponderance standard, warning through suspension/expulsion/degree revocation, Provost appeal within two weeks and a decision within three) is drawn from the Student Rights Policies document and the Appeals Center's "Violations of Student Code of Conduct" page, which are consistent with each other on sanctions and the "permanent mark on transcript" language. ACCOMPANIMENT: no advisor, attorney, or support-person right is stated anywhere in the sources reviewed; the hearing process names only the student's own attendance or a written statement. RECORDING: not addressed for a disciplinary hearing in any source reviewed; a separate, unrelated policy addresses recording of live classroom sessions and is not used here. OFFICE: Office of Student Affairs, 555 17th St., Suite 1000, Denver, CO 80202, student.affairs@csuglobal.edu, (866) 734-5890 — all confirmed on the Appeals Center's own Contact Us page; no academic-integrity-specific sub-office is separately published. OMBUDS/ADVOCACY: searched csuglobal.edu and csuglobalhelp.knowledgeowl.com for "ombudsperson," "ombudsman," and "student advocate"; found only "Student Success Counselor," a general advising role named repeatedly as a contact point but never described as independent, confidential, or neutral, so it is not presented here as an ombuds or advocacy office. Nothing paraphrase-pending. Archive captures pending. Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-10-17).

2026-10-17 — Internet Archive captures requested this date by an automated capture pass; 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: appeals.csuglobal.edu/academic-integrity/academic-dishonesty → https://web.archive.org/web/20261017115608/https://appeals.csuglobal.edu/academic-integrity/academic-dishonesty/; Plagiarism and AI — CSU Global Appeals Center → https://web.archive.org/web/20261017115641/https://appeals.csuglobal.edu/academic-integrity/plagiarism-policy/; Violations of Student Code of Conduct — CSU Global Appeals Center → https://web.archive.org/web/20261017115817/https://appeals.csuglobal.edu/academic-integrity/violations-of-student-code-of-conduct/; appeals.csuglobal.edu/contact-us → https://web.archive.org/web/20261017115931/https://appeals.csuglobal.edu/contact-us; Student Rights Policies → https://web.archive.org/web/20261017120232/https://csuglobal.edu/student-policies/student-rights-policies; csuglobalhelp.knowledgeowl.com/help/academic-dishonesty → https://web.archive.org/web/20261017120504/https://csuglobalhelp.knowledgeowl.com/help/academic-dishonesty; Using the Similarity Report and Avoiding Plagiarism — CSU Global Student Help Center → https://web.archive.org/web/20261017120645/https://csuglobalhelp.knowledgeowl.com/help/using-similarity-report-and-avoiding-plagiarism.

Spot an error or an outdated quotation? hello@gatheredwork.com — corrections are made on the record, in this log.