University of North Carolina at Greensboro.
- Detection status
- Turnitin confirmed deployed via Canvas for text-similarity checking; the College of Arts & Sciences separately states Turnitin's AI detection, built into Feedback Studio, produced results that were "all over the place" in testing; no UNCG page confirms whether the AI writing indicator specifically is enabled; Respondus LockDown Browser and Monitor documented for exam proctoring, not text detection
- Office in these sources
- Office of Student Rights & Responsibilities · 236B Elliott University Center, 507 Stirling Street, Greensboro, NC 27412 · 336-334-4640 · osrr@uncg.edu · osrr.uncg.edu
- Ombuds or advocacy office
- None located on the institution's own pages in this review.
- Sources last checked
- Sep 25, 2026
Reproduced from the institution's own pages quoted below — potentially relevant official sources, not a determination of which one governs any case.
UNC Greensboro's published sources on AI detection and academic integrity, quoted and linked below. An academic-integrity matter is governed by UNCG's Academic Integrity Policy (approved Fall 2009; modified Summer 2016; amended by the Faculty Senate 5/3/2017; approved by the Chancellor 5/8/2017; a generative-AI addendum, Appendix C, was added Summer 2025), which is "in effect during all phases of a student's academic career" and is administered by the Office of Student Rights and Responsibilities. Appeals from an Academic Integrity hearing panel are directed "in the manner prescribed by the Student Code of Conduct," a separate document that governs general, non-academic student conduct. Course syllabi may add their own AI rules — the policy's own appendices provide sample syllabus language ranging from prohibiting generative AI to requiring it — and where an instructor states no guidance, the policy treats GAI use "analogously to assistance from another person." These are potentially relevant official sources, not a determination of which one governs any case — confirm applicability with the institution. Any dates are quoted from the sources, not a deadline calculation performed for you.
Turnitin is documented at UNCG — its AI-detection feature is documented as unreliable, not as absent
UNCG's own Information Technology Services page for Turnitin describes what the tool does and who can use it, with no mention of AI anywhere on the page (page marked Last Updated: July 31, 2026; retrieved Sep 4, 2026):
Source: Turnitin — learningtech.uncg.edu. Scope: any Canvas assignment where the instructor enables it, university-wide. Who sees results: the instructor always; the student only if the instructor enables similarity reports for that assignment. This page names text-matching plagiarism detection specifically and does not confirm or deny that Turnitin's separate AI writing indicator feature is active on UNCG's account.
That separate feature is addressed elsewhere, by the College of Arts & Sciences' own academic-technology training material, in a section of the page addressing the risks of AI detection tools (no on-page date displayed; retrieved Sep 4, 2026):
Source: Generative AI — cas.uncg.edu. The international-student caution cites reporting external to UNCG (themarkup.org, Aug. 14, 2023), reproduced here as UNCG's own page cites it rather than independently verified. This is training material for instructors inside one college rather than a university-wide policy statement, and it is reproduced at that scope: it confirms the AI-detection feature exists inside the Feedback Studio product UNCG already runs, and that UNCG's own academic-technology staff found its results inconsistent in testing, not that the feature is switched on or off for graded submissions campus-wide.
UNCG's central AI-guidance site stated the same caution in general terms, without naming a vendor (no on-page date displayed; retrieved Sep 4, 2026). As of Sep 25, 2026 that page returns HTTP 404 and a search of ai.uncg.edu found no page carrying the passage, so it is shown as last verified Sep 4, 2026 and can no longer be checked first-party:
Source: AI Tools — ai.uncg.edu (ai.uncg.edu/resources/ai-tools/; no longer linked). No detector was named; this is guidance about detection tools as a class, from the office that also administers UNCG's AI governance.
Exam proctoring is a separate stack from text detection at UNCG, and is described that way in the sources reviewed: instructors may require Zoom or Respondus LockDown Browser with Monitor for online exams, and the University Proctoring Lab offers in-person proctoring for computer-based exams — a video and browser-lockdown service, not a written-text AI detector. No page reviewed states that Respondus's monitoring output feeds into an academic-integrity finding the way a Turnitin score would.
Stating the remaining absences at the scope actually searched: no AI-detection tool beyond Turnitin's built-in feature was located as a UNCG deployment in this review across the named vendors — Turnitin and its SimCheck and Originality product names, Copyleaks, iThenticate, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Packback, Grammarly Authorship, Honorlock, Proctorio, Respondus and Examity — nor on UNCG's Instructional Tools catalogue, the AI-at-UNCG site, the College of Arts & Sciences' academic-technology pages, the Office of Student Rights and Responsibilities' pages, or the University Libraries' pages. No separate graduate, thesis or dissertation originality-checking pipeline and no iThenticate deployment was located on the institution's own pages. No first-party statement addressing what evidentiary weight an AI-writing score carries once a case is filed was located; the only weight language found is the general caution quoted above, that such tools "should not be considered a definitive measure for cheating."
What UNCG's own documents say about how cases proceed
- Who may be present
- Under the heading "Support Person" in the hearing-participants table: "Responding Party is allowed to have one support person during hearing who serves as a silent observer during the hearing." A "Student Advisor," described as a "Representative of the Student Attorney General's Office," is separately assigned to assist the student. On recording: hearing panel proceedings are preserved as "transcripts or recordings" under the University's Record Retention Policy, meaning the hearing itself is recorded by the institution; whether a student may make their own recording is not stated in the sources reviewed. — Academic Integrity Case Process and Academic Integrity Policy §7 (no on-page date displayed on the process page; the Policy itself carries no single revision date for §7; retrieved Sep 4, 2026) · osrr.uncg.edu — Academic Integrity Case Process
- What follows on the record
- "Information about expulsion and Academic Integrity violations may be maintained permanently in the student's conduct record." Disclosure is limited: "information may only be communicated between UNCG parties who have a 'Legitimate Educational Interest' in the communication of the information," under FERPA. On retention of the hearing record specifically: "All transcripts or recordings of each panel hearings shall be preserved in accordance with the University's Record Retention Policy... Following this period, the transcript or recording shall be destroyed." No statement of disclosure to graduate programs, employers, or licensing boards beyond this FERPA-governed, legitimate-interest standard was located. — Academic Integrity Policy §7, Confidentiality and Records (retrieved Sep 4, 2026) · sa.uncg.edu — 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.
UNCG's Academic Integrity Policy addendum writes generative AI into an appendix rather than into the core cheating definition, and states its own default rule for a syllabus that says nothing (Appendix C, Addendum Summer 2025; retrieved Sep 4, 2026):
Source: Academic Integrity Policy, Appendix C — sa.uncg.edu. The core policy's cheating definition, unchanged by the addendum, covers "obtain[ing] assistance from someone else that goes beyond mere editing to writing of the assignment or solving of the problem" — the clause the addendum's default rule routes an unauthorized-GAI case through.
The evidentiary standard and the hearing process are stated in the core policy and repeated on the case-process page:
Source: Academic Integrity Case Process — osrr.uncg.edu. Appeal from a hearing panel's decision is not detailed in the Academic Integrity Policy itself, which states only that "[a]ny appeal from the decision of the hearing panel will be directed in the manner prescribed by the Student Code of Conduct" — a hierarchy note reproduced as the policy states it, not resolved here since the appeal windows themselves sit in that separate document.
Sanctions run from educational remedies through grade penalties to suspension or expulsion, with a distinction the policy draws for itself: "Faculty have discretion in assigning any grade-related sanction," while "Additional sanctions, including suspension or expulsion, may only be assigned by a hearing panel." First violations may be eligible for an "Educational Resolution Program," under which "[i]f the student successfully completes the Educational Resolution Program by the deadlines indicated, upon graduation, the student's conduct record will not reflect an Academic Integrity violation" — the one route by which a first violation avoids the permanent-record outcome quoted in the docket row above. What any of this means for a particular case is for the institution and its process to determine, with sources: Academic Integrity Policy — sa.uncg.edu and Academic Integrity Case Process — osrr.uncg.edu.
Where the documents live
| Document | Location |
|---|---|
| Academic Integrity Policy, including Appendix C generative-AI addendum (approved Fall 2009; amended 2017; Appendix C added Summer 2025): definitions, evidentiary standard, sanctions, records/confidentiality, hierarchy note on appeal | sa.uncg.edu — Academic Integrity Policy |
| Academic Integrity Case Process (reporting, hearing, support person and Student Advisor, charge-letter timeline) | osrr.uncg.edu — Academic Integrity Case Process |
| Office of Student Rights & Responsibilities (contact) | 236B Elliott University Center, 507 Stirling Street, Greensboro, NC 27412 · 336-334-4640 · osrr@uncg.edu (from the office's pages, retrieved Sep 4, 2026) · osrr.uncg.edu |
| Turnitin (ITS Instructional Tools; text-similarity checking, Last Updated Jul 31, 2026) | learningtech.uncg.edu — Turnitin |
| Generative AI training page, College of Arts & Sciences ("AI detection built into its Feedback Studio... results were all over the place") | cas.uncg.edu — Generative AI |
| AI Tools, AI at UNCG (general caution that detection software is imperfect and not a definitive measure; HTTP 404 as of Sep 25, 2026, no successor located) | ai.uncg.edu/resources/ai-tools/ (retrieved Sep 4, 2026; no longer linked) |
| Virtual Proctoring for UNCG Students (Respondus LockDown Browser and Monitor; University Proctoring Lab) | testing.uncg.edu — Virtual Proctoring |
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
2026-09-04 — Page created. All quotations captured this date, first-party, from the sa.uncg.edu, osrr.uncg.edu, learningtech.uncg.edu, cas.uncg.edu, ai.uncg.edu and testing.uncg.edu pages linked beside them; every source quoted here was fetched and read as text rather than summarized. Source dates as the sources give them: the Academic Integrity Policy carries an approval history running Fall 2009 to 5/8/2017, with Appendix C added Summer 2025; the Turnitin instructional-tools page is marked Last Updated: July 31, 2026; the CAS Generative AI page, the AI Tools page, the Academic Integrity Case Process page and the proctoring page display no on-page date, which is stated beside each quotation. Detection sweep recorded for a later reviewer. Named-vendor sweep — Turnitin (including SimCheck and Originality), Copyleaks, iThenticate, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Packback, Grammarly Authorship, Honorlock, Proctorio, Respondus, Examity: Turnitin found and documented, deployed via Canvas for text-similarity checking, with a separate AI-detection feature inside its Feedback Studio product documented by the College of Arts & Sciences as producing inconsistent testing results; Respondus (LockDown Browser and Monitor) found as the exam-proctoring technology, described in the sources as video/browser-lockdown proctoring rather than text detection; Copyleaks, iThenticate, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Packback, Grammarly Authorship, Honorlock and Examity: nothing located as a UNCG deployment (Grammarly appears once, on an accessibility-office page, as a writing tool students may use, not as an institutional detector). Category sweep — the ITS Instructional Tools catalogue; the AI at UNCG site and its governance pages; the College of Arts & Sciences' academic-technology training pages; the Office of Student Rights and Responsibilities' pages; the University Libraries' pages; graduate, thesis and dissertation pipeline (nothing located, no separate originality-checking workflow and no iThenticate). Ombuds trap checked, not assumed: a University Ombuds position was the subject of a finalist campus visit announced in a May 2022 UNCG news post; no current ombuds office page, contact, or landing page was found on uncg.edu in this review, and a site search for "ombuds" on uncg.edu returns only that 2022 announcement — recorded as none located rather than as the 2022 search standing in for a current office. Disqualification check run on the completed inventory: UNCG has not disabled or recommended against AI detection across the board — the College of Arts & Sciences confirms the AI-detection feature exists inside the Turnitin product UNCG already runs, and the cautions located (results "all over the place"; tools are "imperfect" and not "a definitive measure for cheating") go to how a score should be read rather than to whether the underlying similarity-checking deployment exists; this is a caution-and-limited-inventory page, not a disqualification. Nothing paraphrase-pending — every quotation on this page was captured as text from a plain fetch. Absences recorded as findings: no page states whether Turnitin's AI writing indicator specifically (as opposed to text-similarity checking generally) is enabled on UNCG's Canvas instance; no first-party statement on the evidentiary weight of an AI-writing score once a case is filed beyond the general caution quoted; no statement on whether a student may make their own recording of a hearing; no appeal window is stated in the Academic Integrity Policy itself, which defers to the separate Student Code of Conduct not read for this page. Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-09-04). Internet Archive captures: to be added.
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).
2026-09-25 — Dead-link repair and source re-verification, run by an automated agent in an attended session; Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-09-25). The AI Tools page of UNCG's central AI site (ai.uncg.edu/resources/ai-tools/) returned HTTP 404 to a cloud crawler and to curl on the host. The site's Resources section no longer lists it, and neither the site search nor its WordPress search endpoint finds the passage or any page on detection. The passage quoted from it in section 01 is kept, labeled as last verified Sep 4, 2026 and no longer verifiable first-party, and the address is no longer linked. The source was dropped from the capture recipe; its last capture is preserved unaltered as tools/packets/uncg-packet-withdrawn-aitools.txt. Every source in this page's capture recipe was re-fetched this date by tools/capture.py on the host (review capture tools/packets/review/uncg-2026-09-25.txt); with that supplement the page traces with zero failures, and the capture was promoted. The cas.uncg.edu training page that section 01 also quotes re-verified verbatim. Detection status unchanged.
Spot an error or an outdated quotation? hello@gatheredwork.com — corrections are made on the record, in this log.