Georgia Gwinnett College.

Detection status: Turnitin AI Checker confirmed deployed as an AI-detection tool, visible to instructors, with GGC's own guidance cautioning it "can result in false positives"; Turnitin Similarity is a separate plagiarism-checking feature
Office in these sources: Dean of Students · Student Center, Building E, Suite 2150 · 678-407-5661 · DeanofStudents@ggc.edu
Ombuds or advocacy office: None located on the institution's own pages in this review.
Sources last checked: Sep 24, 2026

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

GGC'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 — course syllabi and instructor permissions also matter here, since GGC's own policy conditions AI use for credit on instructor permission. Confirm applicability with the institution. Any dates are quoted from the sources, not a deadline calculation performed for you.

01Detection status

AI detection is in use at GGC

GGC's Artificial Intelligence page lists an "AI Tools Inventory," maintained by the AI Steering Committee, that names the Turnitin AI Checker directly (retrieved Sep 24, 2026):

"Turnitin AI Checker Turnitin's AI Checker is considered an AI detection tool. It may be used to assist instructors with identifying potential AI usage in student assignments. Caution: AI detection tools such as Turnitin's AI Checker can result in false positives. Instructors should use the AI Checker as one of many tools and methods in their evaluation of student assignments."

The same inventory separately lists Turnitin Similarity as a distinct, plagiarism-focused feature: "Turnitin Similarity is a plagiarism detection feature embedded in the MyCourses Assignments tool that scans for similarity within a student's written submission." It also lists two exam-proctoring tools in the same inventory — ProctorU and Respondus Monitor — each described as flagging "irregularities or suspicious behaviors during testing sessions," not as text-based AI detectors. Source: Artificial Intelligence — Georgia Gwinnett College (page content maintained by the AI Steering Committee; no on-page publication date displayed; retrieved Sep 24, 2026). This inventory is shown after selecting the page's "Teaching and Learning" tab.

GGC's IT Service Catalog documents the AI Checker's rollout and its ongoing operation in its MyCourses update posts. In April 2023 (retrieved Sep 24, 2026, shown after expanding the post's "AI Writing Detection" section):

"AI writing detection is now available with GGC's Turnitin license. The AI indicator is included in the Turnitin Similarity Report. The AI writing report is only available to instructors."

Source: Academic Technology Updates for April 2023 — IT Service Catalog. More than two years later, the same catalog documents the tool as still active and describes visibility (dated Jul 22, 2025; retrieved Sep 24, 2026):

"On August 5, Turnitin AI writing scores will be available in the Assignments dropbox. Instructors will be able to view AI writing scores directly in the dropbox without opening individual reports." "AI writing scores will remain hidden from students. Instructors can share the AI reports with students at their discretion."

Source: Academic Technology Updates for July 2025 — IT Service Catalog. A named-vendor and category sweep of ggc.edu (Turnitin, Turnitin AI writing indicator, SimCheck, Originality, Copyleaks, iThenticate, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Packback, Grammarly Authorship, Honorlock, Proctorio, Respondus, Examity, and IT/academic-technology update pages) found no other AI-text detector named or deployed beyond the Turnitin AI Checker.

On AI-use rules themselves, GGC's Academic Integrity Policy states: "The use of Artificial Intelligence ("AI"), on any assignment submitted for credit is prohibited unless specifically permitted by the course instructor." Source: Academic Integrity Policy for Academic Dishonesty Matters — Administrative Policy Manual §4.1.1.1.2 (Effective Date Aug 1, 2025; Revision History Aug 6, 2026 (minor change); retrieved Sep 24, 2026). Your syllabus and assignment instructions are therefore among the relevant sources for your own situation.

02Published process

What GGC's own pages say about how cases proceed

Who may be present: "Both the student and the instructor may invite an advisor to be present during this meeting and any phase of this process; however, advisors are not permitted to speak or to participate directly in the process." — Administrative Policy Manual §4.1.1.1.2, Faculty Adjudication Process (Effective Aug 1, 2025; retrieved Sep 24, 2026) · Academic Integrity Policy — APM §4.1.1.1.2
What follows on the record: Not stated in the sources reviewed for the Faculty Adjudication Process, which is limited to academic sanctions (failing grade, point reduction, retake, reprimand, or referral to a seminar) rather than a transcript notation. A copy of the decision letter is "filed in the student's conduct record within the Dean of Students Office." — Administrative Policy Manual §4.1.1.1.2 (retrieved Sep 24, 2026) · Academic Integrity Policy — APM §4.1.1.1.2

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

GGC resolves academic-integrity allegations through the Administrative Policy Manual's §4.1.1.1.2, either by a "Faculty Adjudication Process" (used when the student has no prior finding and the behavior does not warrant more than an academic sanction) or, for cases that may warrant suspension, expulsion, or another nonacademic sanction, a "Formal Resolution (Student Conduct Board hearing)" — a separate, more serious track this page does not detail further. On the Faculty Adjudication Process, the policy states (Effective Date Aug 1, 2025; Revision History Aug 6, 2026 (minor change); retrieved Sep 24, 2026):

"The instructor will notify the student of the need to meet to discuss the allegations via the student's College email address." "The student shall then have five College business days from the time of the notification to contact the instructor to schedule a meeting." "Both the student and the instructor may invite an advisor to be present during this meeting and any phase of this process; however, advisors are not permitted to speak or to participate directly in the process." "At the conclusion of the meeting, the instructor will make a decision regarding the alleged violation. The standard of proof shall be preponderance of evidence."

Sanctions available to the instructor under this track are: "Failure of the course," "Reduction of final course grade," 'No credit ("0" for assignment)', "Reduction of points earned on the assignment," "Retake/replace assignment," "Reprimand," or "Referral to educational seminar/workshop" — issued "separately or in combination." On appeal, the policy states:

"Students wishing to appeal a decision from the Faculty Adjudication Process must file an appeal with the appropriate dean. The student will have 15 College business days from the date of the decision letter to submit the written appeal." "If the student wishes to appeal the dean's decision, they may then appeal to the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs/Provost ("Provost") within 15 College business days of the decision. The Provost will issue a decision letter to the student or remand the case back to a Formal Resolution. The decision of the Provost is the final institutional decision."

Source: Academic Integrity Policy for Academic Dishonesty Matters — Administrative Policy Manual §4.1.1.1.2. Whether a meeting may be recorded, and any transcript notation, retention, or disclosure terms for a Formal Resolution (Student Conduct Board hearing), are not addressed in this section of the policy and were not located elsewhere in this review; the Student Code of Conduct governs that separate track. What any of this means for a particular case is for the institution and its process to determine; these are reproduced so you can read the originals in context.

03Source map

Where the documents live

Document	Location
Artificial Intelligence (AI Tools Inventory, incl. Turnitin AI Checker)	ggc.edu/artificial-intelligence (no on-page date displayed; retrieved Sep 24, 2026)
Academic Technology Updates for April 2023 (AI writing detection rollout)	itservices.ggc.edu — April 2023 (dated Apr 25, 2023; retrieved Sep 24, 2026)
Academic Technology Updates for July 2025 (AI writing scores in dropbox)	itservices.ggc.edu — July 2025 (dated Jul 22, 2025; retrieved Sep 24, 2026)
Academic Integrity Policy for Academic Dishonesty Matters — APM §4.1.1.1.2	catalog.ggc.edu — APM §4.1.1.1.2 (Effective Aug 1, 2025; Revision Aug 6, 2026; retrieved Sep 24, 2026)
Dean of Students (office landing page and contact)	ggc.edu/about/departments/student-affairs/dean-of-students (no on-page date displayed; retrieved Sep 24, 2026)
Dean of Students	Student Center, Building E, Suite 2150 · 678-407-5661 · DeanofStudents@ggc.edu (from the office's own page, retrieved Sep 24, 2026)

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

2026-09-24 — Page created. All quotations retrieved this date from the ggc.edu and catalog.ggc.edu pages linked beside them; source pages carried their own dates of Apr 25, 2023 and Jul 22, 2025 (IT Service Catalog posts) and Aug 1, 2025 with an Aug 6, 2026 minor-change revision (Academic Integrity Policy, APM §4.1.1.1.2); the Artificial Intelligence page and the Dean of Students page display no on-page date. Detection-inventory sweep performed: named-vendor sweep of ggc.edu (Turnitin, 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 of the Artificial Intelligence page's AI Tools Inventory and the IT Service Catalog's MyCourses/Turnitin update posts. The Turnitin AI Checker is confirmed as GGC's deployed AI-writing detector, distinct from Turnitin Similarity (plagiarism/text-similarity) and from ProctorU and Respondus Monitor (exam proctoring, not text detection); no other AI-text detector was found. TRANSPORT NOTE: the AI Tools Inventory is organized into tabs ("Multimedia and Design," "Productivity Tools," "Teaching and Learning") and the Turnitin AI Checker entry is shown only after selecting "Teaching and Learning" in a browser; the April 2023 IT Service Catalog post similarly requires expanding an "AI Writing Detection" accordion section to display its body text. Both were read in a browser to confirm the text quoted above. Ombuds/advocacy sweep: no office titled ombuds, ombudsperson, or student advocate was found anywhere on ggc.edu. Paraphrase-pending: none. Deliberate omission: the Formal Resolution (Student Conduct Board hearing) track, which APM §4.1.1.1.2 names for cases that may warrant suspension, expulsion, or another nonacademic sanction, is governed by the separate Student Code of Conduct; its accompaniment, recording, transcript-notation, retention, and disclosure terms were not located within this review's search of APM §4.1.1.1.2 and are not presented here rather than assumed from the Faculty Adjudication Process, which this page instead quotes as the track GGC states is used for cases without a prior finding and without more than an academic sanction. Internet Archive captures: to be added. Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-09-24).

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