Southeast Missouri State University.
- Detection status
- No AI-writing detector is named as deployed anywhere in SEMO's own pages; the IT Knowledge Base's Canvas and Third Party Tools catalogs list no Turnitin, Copyleaks, or similar product at all, only Respondus LockDown Browser, an exam-lockdown tool with no AI-writing-detection claim
- Office in these sources
- Office of Student Conduct · University Center 422 · 573-651-2264 · lrcarter@semo.edu
- Ombuds or advocacy office
- None located on the institution's own pages in this review.
- Sources last checked
- Oct 9, 2026
Reproduced from the institution's own pages quoted below — potentially relevant official sources, not a determination of which one governs any case.
SEMO'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 may also apply, since SEMO's own policy has the course syllabus carry the grade-sanction rules for a given class. Confirm applicability with the institution. Any dates are quoted from the sources, not a deadline calculation performed for you.
No AI-text detector found in SEMO's own pages
SEMO IT's public Knowledge Base (TDClient, no on-page date displayed; retrieved Oct 9, 2026) organizes its "Teaching & Learning" articles into named subcategories, including a "Third Party Tools" category and a separate "Canvas" category. Neither names Turnitin, Copyleaks, SimCheck, Originality, iThenticate, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Packback, Grammarly Authorship, Honorlock, Proctorio, or Examity. The Third Party Tools category lists exactly three articles: a Films on Demand access guide, a PDF-signing guide, and "Respondus LockDown Browser - iPad." The 31-article Canvas category repeats Respondus under two further titles, one of which describes it directly:
Source: IT Knowledge Base — Canvas and IT Knowledge Base — Third Party Tools (no on-page date displayed; retrieved Oct 9, 2026). Respondus LockDown Browser locks down the testing environment during an exam; nothing in either listing claims it evaluates writing for AI generation, so it is recorded here as a proctoring tool, not a detector.
SEMO's Office of Student Conduct pages — the general faculty-resources guidance and the Code of Student Conduct itself — describe academic-dishonesty referrals and syllabus statements without naming any detection tool. Faculty profile pages and Faculty Senate minutes document a 2023 CTL (Center for Teaching and Learning) presentation on using ChatGPT and AI in the workplace, which concerns using AI, not detecting it, and the University Library's site returned nothing about AI detection on the same search terms.
Scope of the search behind the above: 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) run against semo.edu and it.semo.edu directly, plus a category sweep of the IT Knowledge Base's Teaching & Learning categories, the Office of Student Conduct's pages, the Code of Student Conduct, the current Academic Policies catalog, CTL-related faculty materials, and the University Library. This is an empty inventory, not a documented prior deactivation of a named tool — no SEMO page states that a detector was ever purchased, enabled, or turned off.
What SEMO's own pages say about how cases proceed
- Who may be present
- For the formal hearing specific to an academic-honesty charge: "they may select a person of the student's choosing to accompany the student to the formal hearing. However, this person may act only in an advisory capacity during the formal hearing." — Academic Policies, Adjudicating Alleged Violations of Academic Honesty (retrieved Oct 9, 2026). The general Code of Student Conduct states a narrower rule for its own judicial-body hearings — "to appear in person, alone or with an advisor from the University community" — with advisors "present to provide consultation to the students they are advising" rather than participating directly, and an attorney-advisor allowed only where the student faces related civil/criminal proceedings or a likely Suspension of more than one semester or Dismissal; both are reproduced rather than resolved. Recording is not addressed in either document.
- What follows on the record
- "A disciplinary file is established for each student referred for disciplinary action. This file is maintained for seven years from the last date of activity... In cases resulting in Probation, Suspension held in abeyance..., Suspension, Dismissal, Expulsion, and Suspension from Residence Life, the disciplinary file will be maintained as a discipline record for at least seven years and indefinitely for specified cases." "Suspension, Dismissal or Expulsion will be indicated on the academic transcript when the student authorizes the transcript release." — Code of Student Conduct (page dated, by its own revision note, Jul 28, 2011; retrieved Oct 9, 2026). Disclosure to a party outside the University beyond that release is not stated in the sources reviewed.
The two questions an adviser raises first, answered from this institution's own published documents — or recorded as not stated in them.
SEMO's current Academic Policies (undergraduate catalog section, no on-page date displayed; retrieved Oct 9, 2026) sets out "Adjudicating Alleged Violations of Academic Honesty" as its own named procedure, separate from — but cross-referencing — the general Code of Student Conduct:
Source: Academic Policies — Academic Honesty. The cross-reference above is what ties this procedure to the Code of Student Conduct's own definition of the evidentiary standard (page dated, by its own revision note, Jul 28, 2011; retrieved Oct 9, 2026):
Source: Code of Student 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.
Where the documents live
| Document | Location |
|---|---|
| IT Knowledge Base — Canvas (detector/tool inventory, Respondus quoted) | it.semo.edu — Canvas (no on-page date displayed; retrieved Oct 9, 2026) |
| IT Knowledge Base — Third Party Tools (detector/tool inventory) | it.semo.edu — Third Party Tools (no on-page date displayed; retrieved Oct 9, 2026) |
| Code of Student Conduct (definitions, hearing rights, sanctions, appeal, record retention, transcript) | semo.edu — Code of Student Conduct (PDF) (page dated, by its own revision note, Jul 28, 2011; retrieved Oct 9, 2026) |
| Academic Policies — Academic Honesty (definitions, adjudication procedure, appeals) | semo.edu — Academic Policies (no on-page date displayed; retrieved Oct 9, 2026) |
| Office of Student Conduct (office contact) | semo.edu/student-conduct (no on-page date displayed; retrieved Oct 9, 2026) |
| Faculty Resources for Student Conduct (referral process, detector sweep) | semo.edu/student-conduct/faculty-resources (no on-page date displayed; retrieved Oct 9, 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
2026-10-09 — Page created in an unattended scheduled build pass; not a human review. All quotations retrieved this date from the pages linked beside them. The Code of Student Conduct PDF displays its own revision history in its footer: "content (substantial)" revised January 8, 2004, an office-name/title update July 1, 2008, and "format... and minor wording changes and/or clarifications (no substantive changes)" on July 28, 2011 — the most recent of these is used as its page date; no other source carries an on-page date. 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) run directly against semo.edu and it.semo.edu returned no AI-writing or plagiarism-detection product beyond Respondus LockDown Browser, an exam-lockdown tool with no detection-of-writing claim in either description found. A category sweep of the IT Knowledge Base's Teaching & Learning categories (Canvas, Third Party Tools), the Office of Student Conduct's pages, the Code of Student Conduct, the current Academic Policies catalog section, CTL-related faculty materials (a 2023 "ChatGPT/AI in the work world" presentation, about use rather than detection), and the University Library found nothing further. Two governing documents, cross-referenced rather than merged. The Code of Student Conduct (general judicial-body process) and the Academic Policies catalog's "Adjudicating Alleged Violations of Academic Honesty" (faculty/department-chair process specific to academic-honesty charges) describe different hearing tracks; the Academic Honesty procedure explicitly ties its own hearings to "the standards provided in the University's Code of Student Conduct," which is why section 02 draws the evidentiary standard from the Code while drawing the hearing steps and appeal grounds from the Academic Policies page. Their accompaniment language differs (a department-community advisor under the Code versus a person of the student's own choosing under the Academic Honesty procedure) and both are reproduced rather than resolved. Not used. A 2024 Faculty Senate bill, located only by its search-result snippet ("the policy and procedures for 'Academic Honesty' in Chapter 5 of the Faculty Handbook will be replaced by this bill"), appears to explain why the Academic Honesty procedure now lives in the catalog rather than the Faculty Handbook the Code's own text still points to; the bill itself was not opened or verified first-party and nothing on this page relies on it. Ombuds search. Searches for "ombuds," "ombudsperson," "student advocacy," and "dean of students advocacy" on semo.edu returned no current office matching those terms; a 2021 news item naming a now-departed "associate dean of students for student advocacy and support" was not treated as evidence of a present-day office under that name. Record question. The Code states disciplinary-file retention and a conditional transcript-notation rule (tied to the student authorizing release) for Suspension, Dismissal, and Expulsion; it does not state a disclosure rule for a party outside the University beyond that authorized release, recorded as not stated rather than assumed. Internet Archive captures: to be added. Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-10-09).
2026-10-09 — 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: IT Knowledge Base — Canvas → https://web.archive.org/web/20261009124538/https://it.semo.edu/TDClient/93/IT/KB/Category/266/Canvas; IT Knowledge Base — Third Party Tools → https://web.archive.org/web/20261009124703/https://it.semo.edu/TDClient/93/IT/KB/Category/269/Third-Party-Tools; semo.edu/student-conduct → https://web.archive.org/web/20261009124820/https://semo.edu/student-conduct/; Code of Student Conduct → https://web.archive.org/web/20261009124939/https://semo.edu/student-conduct/_pdfs/code_of_student_conduct_3.pdf; semo.edu/student-conduct/faculty-resources → https://web.archive.org/web/20261009125050/https://semo.edu/student-conduct/faculty-resources; Academic Policies — Academic Honesty → https://web.archive.org/web/20261009125124/https://semo.edu/student-support/academic-support/registrar/catalog/policies.
Spot an error or an outdated quotation? hello@gatheredwork.com — corrections are made on the record, in this log.