National University.

Detection status: Turnitin similarity checking in use across coursework (Brightspace and NCUOne) and the doctoral Doctoral Record; NU's Generative AI guidelines state that the Office of Student Conduct considers third-party AI-detection software and usage reports “insufficient to prove plagiarism”; no statement enabling or disabling Turnitin's AI writing indicator located
Office in these sources: Office of Community Standards (OCS) — no location or phone stated in these sources · ocs@nu.edu · online report at nu.edu/reportit · nu.edu/student-services/student-conduct
Ombuds or advocacy office: Office of the University Ombudsman — “an informal, impartial, independent, neutral and confidential place for community members to address concerns” per NU; open to faculty, staff and students · (858) 642-8368 · ombuds@nu.edu · nu.edu/our-university/the-university/office-of-the-ombudsman
Sources last checked: Sep 5, 2026

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

National University's published sources on AI detection and academic integrity, quoted in brief and linked below. These are potentially relevant official sources, not a determination of which one governs any case — the Student Code of Conduct published in the General Catalog (Addendum B to Catalog 88, updates effective March 30, 2026) is the governing disciplinary text and carries the Academic Dishonesty and Generative AI provisions; the library's Student-Faculty Use Guidelines for Generative AI and the Academic Success Center's writing guides are guidance layers that the Code itself points to; the Code defers instructor-level handling to a Faculty Handbook that is not published on NU's public pages; and NU's guidelines state that each instructor's syllabus or course template may set its own AI-use rules. Confirm applicability with the institution. Any dates or deadlines are quoted from the sources, not a deadline calculation performed for you.

01Detection status

What is documented — and what isn't

NU runs Turnitin as a similarity checker across its coursework, and says so in several places. The Academic Success Center's writing guide (page last updated Aug 26, 2026; retrieved Sep 5, 2026) states it in one sentence:

"To monitor for potential plagiarism, the University submits student assignments through the institution’s third-party text matching service (Turnitin)."

The IT Services Learning Technology guide (page last updated Sep 2, 2026; retrieved Sep 5, 2026) describes where it runs and who sees the output — the student does, alongside the instructor:

"When you submit your writing assignments in the learning management system, they will typically be automatically run through Turnitin. You have full access to the Turnitin originality report."

The same guide describes the report as a text-match report — "the similarity index represents all text matches, including references, direct quotes, etc." — and documents Turnitin Draft Coach, a self-check tool in the Microsoft Word web application, and a Turnitin Pre-Check folder available in some courses. NU's library help desk (LibAnswers FAQ, undated; retrieved Sep 5, 2026) adds that in Brightspace the tool is instructor-enabled: "Turnitin may be available in your Brightspace course if it's been enabled by the instructor."

The doctoral pipeline runs the same tool rather than a separate one. The Doctoral Center's guide to the Doctoral Student Experience — the five-chapter dissertation track for all PhD programs and the DBA, DCJ and DPA — states (page last updated Jun 8, 2026; retrieved Sep 5, 2026):

"Your dissertation milestones uploaded to the Doctoral Record will also be run through Turnitin"

— the sentence continues with a link to NU's academic integrity standards in the catalog. The Doctoral Record is the committee-review shell where each chapter, the proposal and the manuscript are submitted; the guide names no other checking tool for dissertation work.

On AI-writing detection specifically, the most direct statement NU publishes appears in the Faculty Guidelines section of its library's Student-Faculty Use Guidelines: Generative AI Tools at NU (page last updated Aug 20, 2026; retrieved Sep 5, 2026). It is instructor-facing, quoted because it describes the weight the conduct office gives a detector report in the process a student experiences:

"The Office of Student Conduct considers third-party AI detection software and AI tool usage reports insufficient to prove plagiarism."

The same guidelines direct faculty who suspect AI misuse to report it through the Academic Misconduct form at nu.edu/reportit, "[a]s with all cases of suspected plagiarism," and state that the Office of Student Conduct "will provide recommendations for educational and/or grading sanctions based on the student’s history of conduct, the severity of the student behavior, and the degree level." The guidelines also state that "[f]aculty must get documented permission from students before putting original student content into any Generative AI tool that is not embedded in the course template." No page in this review states whether Turnitin's AI writing indicator is switched on or off in NU's Turnitin instance; the guidelines' sentence above is a statement about evidentiary weight, not about configuration, and it is recorded here as such.

The governing text treats AI misuse as an academic-integrity matter without naming any detection tool. The Student Code of Conduct (Addendum B to General Catalog 88; updates effective March 30, 2026; retrieved Sep 5, 2026) carries a Generative Artificial Intelligence provision:

"Instances of improper use of AI may be considered academic integrity violations as per this policy."

The Academic Success Center's writing guide states the same rule from the student's side: "Misuse of AI in courses constitutes a breach of academic integrity as defined by the Student Code of Conduct." It also states that "[i]t is the student’s responsibility to consult their course syllabus, course template, or instructor before making use of such tools," and the library guidelines state that "[i]n the absence of a specific course policy, these guidelines stand as the default expectation." Two library pages that search engines index under this topic — the library's FAQs About ChatGPT page and its Faculty Voices on AI page — returned a notice on Sep 5, 2026 that the page is not currently available because of its visibility settings, and nothing from them is quoted here.

Named-vendor sweep across nu.edu, resources.nu.edu (LibGuides) and nu.libanswers.com found no reference to Copyleaks, iThenticate, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Grammarly Authorship, SafeAssign, or Unicheck, and no reference to Honorlock, Proctorio, or Respondus. Three names did turn up, none of them documented as an AI-writing detector: Examity, which NU's Testing Services pages offer as a virtual proctor for placement tests such as the WritePlacer essay (page modified Oct 20, 2020; retrieved Sep 5, 2026) — a proctoring arrangement scoped to testing services, with no AI-writing-detection function described; Grammarly, which an Academic Technology help-desk answer (last updated Nov 17, 2025) offers students as a self-check plagiarism checker when Turnitin is unavailable, quoting the vendor's own description; and Packback, which appears in one course reading-list guide (ABA632, last updated Jun 15, 2025) as a discussion platform whose grade syncs to Brightspace, not as a detection tool. Category sweep — the Brightspace and NCUOne learning-technology guides, the Doctoral Center's dissertation pipeline, Testing Services' proctoring pages, and the Academic Success Center and library guides — turned up only the Turnitin deployments described above. That negative result is stated at the scope actually searched: NU's own domains, this session, not a claim that no such tool exists anywhere at NU.

Sources: Writing Resources — Using Generative AI (Chat GPT and others) · Learning Technology — Turnitin · How do I use Turnitin to check my writing for plagiarism? (Ask Us!) · Doctoral Center — The Doctoral Student Experience (DSE) · Student-Faculty Use Guidelines: Generative AI Tools at NU · Addendum B to General Catalog 88 — Student Code of Conduct (PDF) · WritePlacer Testing.

02Published process

What NU's own documents say about how cases proceed

Who may be present: “The parties may each have a Support Person of their choice present with them for all meetings and interviews within the SCRP, if they choose.” A second sentence sets the limit: “A Support Person must serve in a voluntary compacity and cannot be retained or paid to participate in the process.” — Student Code of Conduct, section K, Support Person Information and Responsibilities (Addendum B to General Catalog 88; updates effective March 30, 2026; retrieved Sep 5, 2026). The Code states that the Support Person “generally may not speak on behalf of their advisee” and that parties are “expected to inform the Investigator(s) of the identity of Support Person at least two (2) business days before the date of their first meeting with Investigators.” The Office of Community Standards' Student FAQ (page modified Aug 12, 2026; retrieved Sep 5, 2026) says the same in plainer words: “You can bring a support person.” No provision on recording an Educational Conference or interview was located in the Code; its only recording rule is a classroom standard for online students, “Do not record sessions without permission.” · Student Code of Conduct (PDF) · OCS — Student FAQ’s
What follows on the record: “All conduct records are maintained by the University indefinitely from the time of their creation and in line with University records policy and procedures established by the University.” — Student Code of Conduct, section N, Disciplinary Records (Addendum B to General Catalog 88; updates effective March 30, 2026; retrieved Sep 5, 2026). On disclosure, the Code's Outcome Notification section states: “The outcome of a SCRP proceeding is part of the education record of the responding student and is protected from release under the Federal Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), except under certain conditions.” The Code lists a “Records, Enrollment, and/or Graduation Hold” among available sanctions and states that “all sanctions must be satisfied prior to release of records, re-enrollment, or graduation” or degree conferral. Not stated in the sources reviewed: whether a finding is noted on the academic transcript, or disclosed to graduate programs, employers, or licensing boards — the Code and the OCS landing and FAQ pages were searched for those terms. The OCS Student FAQ states of the low-level Civility Notice only that “[t]his is notice is not a permanent conduct record, it serves as a written warning”; it does not say the same of the Academic Integrity Notice. · Student Code of Conduct (PDF) · OCS — Student FAQ’s

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

The Student Code of Conduct's Academic Dishonesty provision sets the filing path (Addendum B to General Catalog 88; retrieved Sep 5, 2026): “Academic Dishonesty violations will be addressed by the instructor utilizing the guidance in the Faculty Handbook on Academic Integrity and Ethics. The instructor will subsequently report any violation that occurs at the University to the OCS at the following link: www.nu.edu/reportit. The OCS is responsible for adjudication and tracking all academic integrity violations that occur at the University.” The Code states that a student “may be subject to classroom, program and institutional sanctions,” with classroom or program sanctions “issued at the discretion of the instructor of record” or program leadership — a penalized grade or program dismissal are the Code's examples — and institutional sanctions assessed by OCS. The policy's stated scope runs from discussion postings and exams to “[d]issertation documents (dissertation chapters, concept papers, proposals and final reports).” The Faculty Handbook the Code refers to was not located on NU's public pages.

The standard of proof is stated once, in the Code's Philosophy Statement: “No student will be found in violation of NU policy without showing it is more likely than not that a policy violation occurred, and any sanctions will be proportionate to the severity of each violation and to the cumulative conduct history of the student.” The Code describes three initial resolutions after OCS's inquiry — a Civility Notice, an Academic Integrity Notice (a written warning “issued to student to remedy concerns”), and, for higher-level matters, a Notice of Investigation that opens the Student Conduct Resolution Process. The Educational Conference that follows is “a meeting held between the assigned investigator and the Respondent via video conference,” designed to present “the details of the allegation(s), the evidence gathered thus far during the investigation and an opportunity to provide their statement of the events.” If the Investigator finds it more likely than not that a violation occurred, the Investigator recommends sanctions to the Associate Director, Community Standards, “who serves as the decision maker.” The sanctions list runs from Warning through University Probation, Suspension, Expulsion, and Revocation of Degree. The OCS Student FAQ adds that an Academic Integrity Notice “will include the Grade Appeal Procedures,” and that if a student does not attend the investigator's meeting, “NU will proceed with the conduct process without your participation.”

A separate description of a school-level route appears on the Academic Success Center's writing guide (page last updated Aug 26, 2026; retrieved Sep 5, 2026): “Faculty members submit an AIV when they find evidence of plagiarism (intentional or unintentional) in a student’s work. Typically, issues are discovered through the Turnitin Similarity Report.” That page states that “[e]ach school has an AIV committee that will review the case and decide on next steps,” that students “receive an email that they have received an AIV,” and that they “have the option to respond to the AIV within 24 hours.” The Code does not describe school AIV committees or a 24-hour response window; how that guide's description relates to the Code's OCS process is not stated in either document, and this page records both without reconciling them.

Appeals are stated in the Code's Appeal Review Process: “All appeals of conduct decisions must be submitted within five (5) business days of the original Outcome Notice, barring exigent circumstances.” Grounds are limited to three — a procedural error that significantly impacted the outcome, new evidence unavailable during the original investigation, and sanctions “substantially outside the precedent set by NU for the same type of offense and/or the cumulative conduct record of the responding student.” Sanctions remain in effect during the appeal, a party is “granted only one appeal,” and “[a]ll appeal decisions are to be made within fifteen (15) business days of submission and are final.” The Code also lists, under Conflict Resolution Options, the “University Ombuds Office at ombuds@nu.edu” among alternatives to a formal complaint. What any of this means for a particular case is for the institution and its process to determine.

03Source map

Where the documents live

Document	Location
Student Code of Conduct — Addendum B to General Catalog 88 (governing text; Academic Dishonesty, Generative AI, Student Conduct Resolution Process, Support Person, Appeal Review Process, Disciplinary Records; updates effective March 30, 2026)	nu.edu PDF
Student-Faculty Use Guidelines: Generative AI Tools at NU (library guide; AI-detection evidentiary statement; last updated Aug 20, 2026)	resources.nu.edu/ai/ai-guidelines
Writing Resources — Using Generative AI (Chat GPT and others) (Academic Success Center; Turnitin text-matching statement and AI-misuse rule; last updated Aug 26, 2026)	resources.nu.edu/writingresources/GenerativeAI
Learning Technology — Turnitin (IT Services; where Turnitin runs, the originality report, Pre-Check and Draft Coach; last updated Sep 2, 2026)	resources.nu.edu/learningtechnology/turnitin
Doctoral Center — The Doctoral Student Experience (DSE) (dissertation pipeline; Doctoral Record milestones run through Turnitin; last updated Jun 8, 2026)	resources.nu.edu Doctoral Center
How do I use Turnitin to check my writing for plagiarism? (NU Library Ask Us! FAQ; Turnitin in Brightspace, instructor-enabled; undated)	nu.libanswers.com/faq/380088
Writing Resources — Academic Integrity Violation (AIV) (Academic Success Center; school AIV committee description; last updated Aug 26, 2026)	resources.nu.edu/writingresources/aiv
Office of Community Standards — office landing page and staff list; email ocs@nu.edu as stated in the Student Code of Conduct; online report at nu.edu/reportit (from the office's pages, retrieved Sep 5, 2026)	nu.edu/student-services/student-conduct
Office of Community Standards — Student FAQ’s (support person; notices; appeal; page modified Aug 12, 2026)	nu.edu/office-of-community-standards-student-faqs
Office of the University Ombudsman — (858) 642-8368 · ombuds@nu.edu · Spectrum Business Park Academic Headquarters, 9388 Lightwave Ave, San Diego, CA 92123, and Scripps Ranch, 9980 Carroll Canyon Rd, San Diego, CA 92131 (page modified Jun 11, 2026)	nu.edu/our-university/the-university/office-of-the-ombudsman
WritePlacer Testing (Testing Services; Examity virtual proctor for placement testing; page modified Oct 20, 2020)	nu.edu/student-services/testing-services/writeplacer-testing
Is there another plagiarism checker I can use when TurnItIn is not an option? (Academic Technology Ask Us! FAQ; Grammarly as a student self-check; last updated Nov 17, 2025)	nu.libanswers.com/ctl/faq/332459
ABA632 Ethics Compliance Code — Packback Resources (course reading-list guide; Packback as a discussion platform, not a detector; last updated Jun 15, 2025)	resources.nu.edu course guide

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

2026-09-05 — Page created. Detection-inventory sweep run first: named-vendor sweep across nu.edu, resources.nu.edu (LibGuides) and nu.libanswers.com found no reference to Copyleaks, iThenticate, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Grammarly Authorship, SafeAssign, or Unicheck, and no reference to Honorlock, Proctorio, or Respondus; Examity turned up on Testing Services' placement-testing pages as a virtual proctor (scoped to testing services, no AI-writing-detection function described), Grammarly on an Academic Technology help-desk answer as a student self-check, and Packback on one course reading-list guide as a discussion platform — none recorded as an AI-writing detector. Category sweep of the Brightspace and NCUOne learning-technology guides, the Doctoral Center's dissertation pipeline, Testing Services' proctoring pages, and the Academic Success Center and library guides found Turnitin similarity checking in coursework and in the Doctoral Record, and no other detector. Disqualification check run on that completed inventory: the library's Generative AI guidelines state that the Office of Student Conduct considers third-party AI-detection software and usage reports "insufficient to prove plagiarism," but this was not treated as a disqualification, because Turnitin remains actively deployed and no page documents its AI writing indicator as disabled — the finding is a published statement on evidentiary weight, recorded in section 01 beside the deployment it qualifies. Captured first-party this date: Addendum B to General Catalog 88 (the Student Code of Conduct, read for the Academic Dishonesty, Generative AI, SCRP, Support Person, Appeal Review Process and Disciplinary Records provisions), the Student-Faculty Use Guidelines for Generative AI, the Academic Success Center's Using Generative AI and AIV guides, the Learning Technology Turnitin guide (the Sep 2, 2026 version; an earlier fetch the same session returned a Jul 10, 2026 version with an additional NCUOne box), the Doctoral Center DSE guide, two Ask Us! FAQs, the Office of Community Standards landing page and Student FAQ, the Office of the University Ombudsman page, the WritePlacer Testing page, and the ABA632 Packback guide. Not captured: the full General Catalog 88 PDF (964 pages), which the fetch tool truncated at roughly its first eighty pages and which the browser could not open past a Cloudflare verification screen that was not bypassed — its Student Code of Conduct is superseded by Addendum B for the provisions quoted here, and the "Institutional Statement on Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use" that the library guidelines say it contains is named on this page only by that reference and is not quoted. Two library pages (FAQs About ChatGPT and Faculty Voices on AI) returned a not-currently-available notice citing visibility settings and are not quoted. Email addresses on nu.edu pages are obscured by Cloudflare email protection; ocs@nu.edu and ombuds@nu.edu are taken from the Student Code of Conduct, where both appear in plain text. Deliberate omissions: the Faculty Handbook on Academic Integrity and Ethics, which the Code cites but which is not on NU's public pages; the OCS SharePoint site, which is login-gated; and the atalearning.org Brightspace guides, which NU's help desk links but which sit on a domain this page does not treat as first-party. The ombuds row names an office open to students, faculty and staff per its own page; that page also states the office does not "[i]ntervene in formal processes." No AI-detection statement in NU's own words beyond those quoted was located. National University is a private institution: this page quotes brief excerpts and links originals; it republishes nothing in full. Internet Archive captures: to be added. Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-09-05).

2026-09-13 — Editorial review. Carrie Schluter read this page in full against its recorded first-party sources and found no change required. Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-09-13).

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