North Carolina A&T State University.
- Detection status
- SafeAssign is confirmed integrated into Canvas at NC A&T for originality/plagiarism checking; no AI-text detector is named anywhere on ncat.edu or support.ncat.edu across a named-vendor and category sweep
- Office in these sources
- Office of the Provost / Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, which administers academic-dishonesty appeals to the University Judicial Tribunal · Dowdy Building, Suite 310, 1601 East Market Street, Greensboro, NC 27411 · 336-334-7965 · asktheprovost@ncat.edu. General Student Conduct Regulations matters are administered separately by the Office of Student Conduct & Conflict Resolution, within the Office of the Dean of Students · 336-334-7614 · osccr@ncat.edu
- Ombuds or advocacy office
- None located on the institution's own pages in this review.
- Sources last checked
- Sep 23, 2026
Reproduced from the institution's own pages quoted below — potentially relevant official sources, not a determination of which one governs any case.
NC A&T's published sources on AI detection and academic integrity, quoted and linked below. Academic dishonesty at NC A&T is handled first at the instructor level, under a separate policy track from the University's general Student Conduct Regulations, and individual colleges (Business and Economics, Science and Technology) publish their own supplementary academic-integrity policies not reproduced here. These are potentially relevant official sources, not a determination of which one governs any case — course syllabi and college-specific policy may also apply. Confirm applicability with the institution. Any dates are quoted from the sources, not a deadline calculation performed for you.
What NC A&T's own pages say about detection tools
A named-vendor sweep (Turnitin, SimCheck, Originality, Copyleaks, iThenticate, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Packback, Grammarly Authorship, Honorlock, Proctorio, Respondus, Examity) and a category sweep (NC A&T's IT support knowledge base, the Aggie Hub instructional-technology pages, the University Writing Center's resource guide, college-level academic-integrity policies, and the Graduate College's thesis and dissertation submission pages) found no AI-text detector confirmed by name anywhere on ncat.edu, support.ncat.edu, or hub.ncat.edu. NC A&T's IT knowledge base (retrieved Sep 23, 2026) describes one originality-checking tool available through Canvas:
Source: Academic Technology Tools and Access for Students — NC A&T IT Support; the parallel faculty-facing article states the same tool in the same terms. Neither page describes SafeAssign as detecting AI-generated writing, and neither names Turnitin or any other AI-writing detector. Respondus LockDown Browser and Respondus Monitor are separately confirmed and documented for exam proctoring — locking down the browser during a test and recording webcam/microphone video of the test session — which the source describes as a testing-environment control, not a text-detection tool: "Respondus Monitor may be used with LockDown Browser to record a student's webcam and microphone during an online exam." Source: Assessment Tools — Aggie Hub (retrieved Sep 23, 2026).
NC A&T's University Writing Center maintains a "Generative AI-Faculty" resource list that links out to externally authored material, including a Vanderbilt University article titled "Guidance on AI Detection and Why We're Disabling Turnitin's AI Detector" and an MIT Sloan piece titled "AI Detectors Don't Work. Here's What to Do Instead." Both are the Writing Center's own characterization of resources it is curating for faculty, not a first-party NC A&T statement about a detector NC A&T itself uses or disables, and neither is treated as evidence of NC A&T's own detection practice here. Source: Writing Resources — University Writing Center (retrieved Sep 23, 2026). No NC A&T page located in this review states that any AI-text detector — Turnitin's or another vendor's — is enabled, disabled, or otherwise in use for identifying AI-generated student writing. That gap, at the scope of the sweeps described above, is the finding.
What NC A&T's own pages say about how cases proceed
- Who may be present
- "Students charged with, or under investigation for non-academic misconduct, may be represented by an Attorney or Non-attorney advocate in a disciplinary conference or administrative hearing." A separate, general rights list states a right "[t]o seek counsel and advice, at their own expense, from a licensed attorney or non-attorney advocate of their choosing" without that carve-out — the handbook does not reconcile the two statements for academic-dishonesty proceedings specifically. On recording: "Neither the complainant nor the accused can make separate recordings" of a hearing; an official recording is made by the university instead. — 2025-26 Student Code of Conduct Handbook (PDF metadata confirms creation date Aug 22, 2025; retrieved Sep 23, 2026) · 2025-26 Student Code of Conduct Handbook
- What follows on the record
- Not stated in the sources reviewed: no transcript notation, graduate-program disclosure, employer disclosure, or licensing-board disclosure for academic dishonesty is described; the sanction itself (loss of credit, or a course grade of "F") is the only stated academic consequence. What is stated: "violations of the Academic Dishonesty Policy are maintained in the Division of Academic Affairs. […] Records of minor offenses are destroyed after eight years, while major offenses involving criminal charges or suspensions and expulsions can be maintained indefinitely." — 2025-26 Student Code of Conduct Handbook (retrieved Sep 23, 2026) · 2025-26 Student Code of Conduct Handbook
The two questions an adviser raises first, answered from this institution's own published documents — or recorded as not stated in them.
NC A&T's 2025-26 Student Code of Conduct Handbook (PDF metadata confirms creation date Aug 22, 2025; retrieved Sep 23, 2026) describes academic dishonesty as a distinct track from the University's general Student Conduct Regulations process:
The tribunal itself, per the handbook's description of the University Judicial Tribunal (academic dishonesty appeals only): "Consists of a pool of ten members evenly divided between students and faculty and selected by the chancellor. The chairperson has faculty rank, presides over hearings and is a non-voting member, except in the case of a tie vote." No further appeal beyond the University Judicial Tribunal is described in the sources reviewed for an academic-dishonesty matter specifically; the general Appellate Procedures chain (Dean of Students → Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs → Chancellor) is stated for Student Conduct Regulations sanctions rather than for academic-dishonesty appeals. Source: 2025-26 Student Code of Conduct Handbook. 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.
Where the documents live
| Document | Location |
|---|---|
| Academic Technology Tools and Access for Students (SafeAssign) | support.ncat.edu — Academic Technology Tools and Access for Students |
| Academic Technology Tools and Access for Faculty and Staff (SafeAssign) | support.ncat.edu — Academic Technology Tools and Access for Faculty and Staff |
| Assessment Tools, Respondus LockDown Browser & Monitor | hub.ncat.edu — Assessment Tools |
| Writing Resources (Generative AI-Faculty resource list) | ncat.edu — University Writing Center, Writing Resources |
| 2025-26 Student Code of Conduct Handbook (academic dishonesty, hearing, appeal, and record provisions) | ncat.edu — 2025-26 Student Code of Conduct Handbook (PDF) |
| Office of the Provost / Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs | ncat.edu/provost (retrieved Sep 23, 2026) |
| Office of the Dean of Students / Office of Student Conduct & Conflict Resolution | ncat.edu — Office of the Dean of Students (retrieved Sep 23, 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.
Revision history of this page
2026-09-23 — Page created. First-party material captured from support.ncat.edu (Academic Technology Tools and Access for Students, and the parallel faculty/staff article — no on-page date displayed), hub.ncat.edu (Assessment Tools — Respondus LockDown Browser and Monitor; no on-page date displayed), ncat.edu (University Writing Center's Writing Resources page, and the Office of the Provost and Office of the Dean of Students contact pages — none carry an on-page date), and the 2025-26 Student Code of Conduct Handbook (PDF metadata confirms creation date Aug 22, 2025). Detector sweep: named-vendor sweep (Turnitin, SimCheck, Originality, Copyleaks, iThenticate, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Packback, Grammarly Authorship, Honorlock, Proctorio, Respondus, Examity) and category sweep (IT support knowledge base, Aggie Hub instructional-technology pages, University Writing Center guidance, college-level academic-integrity PDFs, Graduate College thesis/dissertation submission pages) came back empty for any AI-text detector; SafeAssign (an originality/similarity tool, not marketed or described by NC A&T as AI-writing detection) and Respondus LockDown Browser/Monitor (exam proctoring) are the only tools confirmed. Not disqualified: no detector was ever documented as in use for AI-writing detection specifically at NC A&T, so neither disqualification branch (no documented detector remains in use; every detector found is disabled or recommended against) is met. The University Writing Center's links to a Vanderbilt University article on disabling Turnitin's AI detector and an MIT Sloan article on AI detectors not working are the Writing Center's own curation of external material for faculty, not a first-party NC A&T statement about NC A&T's own detection practice, and are not treated as evidence of NC A&T's status either way. Ombuds/advocacy sweep: no ombudsperson or student-advocacy office located on ncat.edu in this review; a federal student-loan "Ombudsman Group" referenced on a financial-aid page is unrelated to academic-integrity matters and not presented here. Procedure capture: the 2025-26 Student Code of Conduct Handbook describes academic dishonesty (Part I.F) as resolved first at the instructor level, reviewed and endorsed by the department Chairperson and Dean, with appeal in writing to the University Judicial Tribunal within one week (seven calendar days); this is a distinct track from the handbook's general Student Conduct Regulations process, and college-level academic-integrity policies (e.g., the Deese College of Business and Economics' and the College of Science and Technology's own PDFs) were located but not incorporated, since the handbook is the University-wide source and reconciling college-level supplements to it is outside this page's scope. The right-to-counsel scope note in section 02 (general "counsel and advice" right versus the hearing-procedures section's non-academic-misconduct carve-out on Attorney/Non-attorney-advocate representation) is reproduced as the handbook states it, without resolving the tension. Nothing paraphrase-pending. Archive captures pending. Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-09-23).
Spot an error or an outdated quotation? hello@gatheredwork.com — corrections are made on the record, in this log.