New Jersey Institute of Technology.

Detection status: Turnitin available via Canvas; its AI-writing detection confirmed in use in First-Year Writing (ENGL 101/102) with published point-deduction thresholds; no institution-wide AI-indicator statement located
Office in these sources: Office of the Dean of Students · Central King Building, L71, Newark, NJ 07102-1982 · 973-596-3466 · dos@njit.edu
Ombuds or advocacy office: None located on the institution's own pages in this review.
Sources last checked: Oct 2, 2026

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

NJIT'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 department rules may also apply, and NJIT itself places AI-use rules largely at the instructor's discretion outside First-Year Writing. 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 in NJIT's First-Year Writing courses

NJIT's Information Services & Technologies (IST) describes the Turnitin products available to instructors through Canvas (no page date; retrieved Oct 2, 2026):

"Turnitin is a tool that can be used by instructors to check student papers online, promoting academic integrity through streamlining grading and feedback while deterring plagiarism." "The Plagiarism Framework integrates into the Canvas assignment workflow." […] Feedback Studio "is designed as an external and generates a Canvas assignment through the tool."

Source: Instructional Technology Tools — IST. That page names Plagiarism Framework, Feedback Studio and iThenticate as the three Turnitin options but does not itself describe an AI-writing feature.

A published Fall 2025 First-Year Writing syllabus (ENGL 102, retrieved Oct 2, 2026) shows Turnitin's AI-writing indicator confirmed in active use, with department-level consequences attached to the score:

"All assignments must be submitted on Canvas (which automatically assesses for plagiarism, AI generation and grammar assistants using Turnitin)." "If a rough draft is found to contain 20-40% AI-generated or assisted written work, 15 points will be deducted from the student's final grade on that assignment. If a final draft is found to contain 20-40% AI-generated or assisted written work, 30 points will be deducted from the student's final grade on that assignment. If a rough or final draft is found to contain 40-100% AI-generated or assisted written work, the work will be reported to the Dean of Students who will meet with the student and determine the final grade on that assignment and if any further action needs to be taken." "Turnitin evaluates all sorts of academic integrity violations. This tool detects unauthorized use of quotes and repurposed text (including borrowing of papers). […] None of these tools are acceptable in student writing in ENGL 101 and ENGL 102."

Source: ENGL 102, Fall 2025 syllabus (Gonzalez) — NJIT course syllabus archive. This is course- and program-level evidence (First-Year Writing, ENGL 101/102); no NJIT page located in this review states that Turnitin's AI-writing indicator is enabled for assignments outside that program, and no NJIT page states what weight, if any, instructors elsewhere should give the score.

Category sweep: NJIT's library FAQ on Turnitin access (dated Oct 22, 2020) and the Provost's Best Practices Related to Academic Integrity document describe Turnitin and general plagiarism-detection practice without naming an AI-writing feature. Searches of NJIT's academic-integrity, student-conduct, IT-services, teaching-center and library pages found no other named AI-text detector (GPTZero, Originality.ai, Copyleaks, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Packback, Grammarly Authorship, Honorlock, Proctorio, Respondus, Examity). IST's own technology plan separately lists "TurnItIn AI Writing Detector" alongside Harmonize Learning and Zoom AI Companion among the generative-AI tools it is working to incorporate into NJIT's digital-learning offerings — undated planning language, not a statement of current campus-wide deployment, and not used here as evidence beyond what it says. Source: IST Strategy — Information Services & Technologies (no page date; retrieved Oct 2, 2026).

On AI-use rules themselves: NJIT's Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence page states students "must adhere to the expectations outlined by their instructors" and that work "remains original and is properly attributed," directing students to syllabi for course-specific rules. Source: Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence — Dean of Students (no page date; retrieved Oct 2, 2026). Your syllabus and assignment instructions are therefore among the relevant sources for your own situation.

02Published procedure

What NJIT's own pages say about how cases proceed

Who may be present: "Conduct Advisors may accompany students to meetings and hearings but may not speak on behalf of the student, present information independently, or otherwise participate directly in the proceedings. They do not serve as legal representatives." — Code of Student Conduct and Academic Integrity Policy, Article 2 (updated June 2026; retrieved Oct 2, 2026) · Code of Student Conduct and Academic Integrity Policy
What follows on the record: An "XF" grade carries transcript notation reading "Failure due to Academic Dishonesty." Removal requires "a. Successful completion of all assigned sanctions. b. Twelve months have passed since the grade of 'XF' was imposed […] c. The student has not been found responsible for another act of academic dishonesty or similar offense." Separately: "Students should be aware that external institutions, licensing boards, graduate programs, or employers may still request or require disclosure of past conduct, regardless of the internal expungement status." — Code of Student Conduct and Academic Integrity Policy, Appendix A and Article 8 (updated June 2026; retrieved Oct 2, 2026) · Code of Student Conduct and Academic Integrity Policy

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

From the Code of Student Conduct and Academic Integrity Policy, updated June 2026 (retrieved Oct 2, 2026) — the current, single document that merges what were previously separate conduct and academic-integrity policies:

"Faculty members must refer any allegations of academic dishonesty to the Office of the Dean of Students. If a student reports a suspected violation by another student to an instructor, the instructor is obligated to report the matter to ODOS without delay. In addition, any member of the NJIT community may report suspected academic dishonesty directly to the Office of the Dean of Students." "The standard of review is the preponderance of the evidence." "Students who wish to file an administrative appeal must complete the appeal request form provided in their outcome letter within five (5) business days of the date listed on their outcome letter." Appeals on non-separable sanctions are limited to "Procedural Error," "New Information" and "Disproportionate Sanctions." Cases resulting in suspension, expulsion, or an "XF" grade are instead "reviewed by the Student Conduct Board as a final review process," with no further standard appeal — and "All decisions of the Appellate Officer are final, and not subject to further appeal" on the administrative-appeal side as well. "No student shall make, attempt to make, or distribute any audio, video, or photographic recording of a person or class without the knowledge and effective consent of all parties involved. […] Recording classroom lectures, discussions, or meetings without the advance permission of the instructor, unless authorized through documented disability accommodations" is prohibited under the Code.

Source: Code of Student Conduct and Academic Integrity Policy. The Dean of Students' own "Student Conduct Process" and "Responding to Academic Integrity Violations" web pages (no page date; retrieved Oct 2, 2026) describe the same process in places using older terminology — "Administrative Hearing" and "Hearing Board" rather than the current document's "Administrative Conference" and "Student Conduct Board Hearing" — and are not quoted here for that reason; see the change log. 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

Document	Location
Code of Student Conduct and Academic Integrity Policy (updated June 2026)	njit.edu/policies — Code of Student Conduct and Academic Integrity Policy
Student Conduct Process	njit.edu/dos/student-conduct-process
Responding to Academic Integrity Violations	njit.edu/dos/responding-academic-integrity-violations
Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence	njit.edu/dos/responsible-use-artificial-intelligence
Instructional Technology Tools (Turnitin products)	ist.njit.edu/instructional-technology-tools
IST Strategy (technology plan naming "TurnItIn AI Writing Detector")	ist.njit.edu/strategy
ENGL 102, Fall 2025 syllabus (Gonzalez) — AI-detection and point-deduction policy	archives.njit.edu — ENGL 102 Fall 2025 syllabus
How can a faculty member access Turnitin? (Ask the NJIT Library, dated Oct 22, 2020)	askthelibrary.njit.edu/faq/269037
Office of the Dean of Students (contact)	njit.edu/dos/contact.php

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

2026-10-02 — Page created. 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 (IST's instructional-technology pages, the IST technology strategy page, the library's Ask-the-Library FAQ, the Provost's Best Practices Related to Academic Integrity document, the Dean of Students' AI and conduct pages, and First-Year Writing course syllabi) found Turnitin as the only detector named anywhere on njit.edu. Its AI-writing indicator is confirmed in current use at the course/program level in First-Year Writing (ENGL 101/102) via a published Fall 2025 syllabus with explicit point-deduction thresholds; no NJIT page located in this review confirms or denies that the same feature is enabled for assignments outside that program, and IST's own technology plan lists incorporating "TurnItIn AI Writing Detector" as a named but undated goal rather than a confirmed current deployment statement — reproduced in section 01 as such, not treated as evidence of campus-wide status. Process facts (investigation, hearing options, preponderance standard, accompaniment, recording, sanctions, transcript notation, appeal grounds and the 5-business-day appeal window, record retention and expungement, and disclosure to third parties) are drawn from the Code of Student Conduct and Academic Integrity Policy, a single PDF dated "Updated June 2026" (version v061126) that merges what were previously separate conduct and academic-integrity documents. An older, separately hosted "University Policy on Academic Integrity" PDF was read first and found to differ in substance from the current document's Appendix A — notably on XF-removal conditions, which the older document ties to a two-attempt Academic Integrity Workshop Series and a permanent "X" on failure, while the current document instead conditions removal on completing all assigned sanctions, a 12-month wait, and no further violation, with no workshop-series mechanism stated. Section 02 was corrected to quote only the current, June 2026 document before publication; the older PDF is not linked from this page and is noted here so the correction is on the record. The Dean of Students' own "Student Conduct Process" and "Responding to Academic Integrity Violations" web pages were also read and still describe the process using the older "Administrative Hearing" / "Hearing Board" terminology rather than the current document's "Administrative Conference" / "Student Conduct Board Hearing"; they are listed in the source map for the preponderance-standard corroboration they still support but are not quoted for process steps that the current document states differently. The ENGL 102 Fall 2025 syllabus PDF is captured with pdftotext's own default mode rather than the recipe tool's first proposal (-raw), because -raw drops the inter-word space at two justified-text line breaks in that document ("mustbe", "thatassignment"); one sentence in that syllabus naming Turnitin's AI-generated-text flag is elided in section 01 rather than quoted in full, because the PDF's line-wrap hyphenation of "AI-generated" is extracted inconsistently across pdftotext's modes and no mode was found that renders both that word and the two space-loss points correctly. The Highlander Integrity Council was reviewed and not used as this page's ombuds/advocacy entry: NJIT's own page describes it as a student group that assists the Dean of Students with integrity programming and sits on the Student Conduct Hearing Board — a body that helps adjudicate cases, not an advocate for an accused student — and the page does not describe it as independent, confidential, or neutral. No ombuds or general student-advocacy office was located on NJIT's own pages in this review. Office contact (Central King Building, L71; 973-596-3466; dos@njit.edu) confirmed from the Dean of Students' own contact page, undated. Internet Archive captures: to be added. Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-10-02).

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