University of Wisconsin-La Crosse.

Detection status: Turnitin's AI detection score confirmed enabled and visible to instructors and administrators only, per UWL's own knowledge-base article; UWS 14 (Wisconsin Administrative Code) governs the hearing process, standard of proof, advisor right, recording, appeal and records identically across the Universities of Wisconsin, as at every other UW System campus in this collection
Office in these sources: Student Life Office · 149 Graff Main Hall · 608-785-8062 · studentlife@uwlax.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.

UW-La Crosse'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 UWL itself requires each instructor to state their own AI-use rules. 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, instructor-visible only

UW-La Crosse's IT knowledge base describes Turnitin's AI detection feature directly (page last updated Apr 13, 2023; retrieved Oct 2, 2026):

"an overall percentage of the document that AI writing tools may have generated" "highlights text segments that the Turnitin model predicts were written by AI" "Only instructors and administrators will see the AI detection option in their Similarity Report."

Source: Turnitin — UW-La Crosse Knowledge Base. The article confirms students do not see the AI detection report and directs instructors to supplementary resources on the tool's reliability without itself stating a reliability figure.

On AI-use rules themselves, UWL's own Syllabus Policy page offers instructors two standard statements to adopt. The limiting version states: "Any use of these tools other than where/how indicated is a violation of course expectations and is subject to UW-La Crosse's academic misconduct policy." The allowing-use version states: "Failing to provide appropriate attribution or citation will be a violation of course expectations and may be subject to UW-La Crosse's academic misconduct policy." Source: UWL Syllabus Policy Information & Statements (retrieved Oct 2, 2026). Your syllabus and assignment instructions are therefore among the relevant sources for your own situation. Category sweep: searches of UWL's IT knowledge base, Student Life, and library pages found no other named AI-text detector.

02Published procedure

What UWL's own pages say about how cases proceed

Who may be present: "The student has the right to be accompanied to meetings and hearings by an advisor, who may be an attorney." At the instructor meeting, "the advisor may not speak on behalf of the student but may counsel the student." At most hearings, an advisor similarly may not "directly question adverse witnesses... or speak on behalf of the respondent," but in cases where suspension, expulsion, or criminal charges are possible, "the advisor may question adverse witnesses, present information and witnesses, and speak on behalf of the respondent." — Academic Misconduct, Student Life (page last modified 03/06/2026; retrieved Oct 2, 2026) · Academic Misconduct — Student Life
What follows on the record: No transcript notation and no records-retention period is stated in UWS 14 itself. A lesser, instructor-level "written reprimand presented only to the student" is not filed, while a more serious written reprimand imposed after an investigating officer's finding is placed in the student's disciplinary file. "Suspension or expulsion shall be systemwide in effect" across the Universities of Wisconsin, and a suspended or expelled student may not enroll elsewhere in the system until the suspension expires or a year has passed. — Wisconsin Administrative Code, Chapter UWS 14, ss. 14.04(1)(b), (h) and 14.12 (Register November 2024 No. 827; retrieved Oct 2, 2026)

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

UW-La Crosse's own Academic Misconduct page states its process steps are "adapted from UWS Chapter 14," administered through the Student Life Office once a hearing is scheduled. Chapter UWS 14 itself (Register November 2024 No. 827; retrieved Oct 2, 2026) states the standard of proof and hearing-record rules:

"The hearing committee may find academic misconduct and impose a sanction of suspension or expulsion only if the proof of such misconduct is clear and convincing. In other cases, a finding of misconduct must be based on a preponderance of the credible evidence." The hearing committee "shall make a record of the hearing," including "a verbatim record of the testimony, which may be a sound recording." On appeal: where the sanction is suspension or expulsion, "the student may appeal to the chancellor to review the decision of the hearing committee on the record," and the chancellor must sustain the committee's decision unless the evidence does not support it, established procedures were not followed with material prejudice to the student, or the decision rested on a legally proscribed factor. Beyond the chancellor, "the Board of Regents may, at its discretion, grant a review upon the record."

Sources: Academic Misconduct — Student Life and Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter UWS 14, Student Academic Disciplinary Procedures, ss. 14.05, 14.06, 14.08(3)(a), (c) and (e), and 14.09-14.10. 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
Turnitin (AI detection feature)	kb.uwlax.edu/127278
UWL Syllabus Policy Information & Statements (AI-use syllabus language)	uwlax.edu/info/syllabus
Academic Misconduct (process summary; advisor rights)	uwlax.edu/student-life — Academic Misconduct
Wisconsin Administrative Code, Chapter UWS 14 (Student Academic Disciplinary Procedures; quoted for standard of proof, recording, and appeal)	docs.legis.wisconsin.gov — UWS 14
Student Life Office (contact)	uwlax.edu/student-life — Student conduct

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. THIRD UW SYSTEM BUILD; reused rather than re-derived the systemwide finding established at the first two (uwgb, uww, both 2026-09-30): no UW-System-wide AI-detection policy exists, and Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter UWS 14 governs the hearing process, standard of proof, advisor right, recording, appeal and records identically across every Universities of Wisconsin campus. Section 02's UWS 14 quotations (standard of proof, hearing record, appeal to the chancellor and the Board of Regents, sanction-filing and systemwide-suspension rules) are the same provisions quoted at uwgb and uww, re-verified against the same Register November 2024 No. 827 text rather than carried on trust. Named-vendor sweep (Turnitin AI writing indicator, SimCheck, Originality, Copyleaks, iThenticate, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Packback, Grammarly Authorship, Honorlock, Proctorio, Respondus, Examity) and category sweep (the IT knowledge base, the Syllabus Policy page, and the Student Life pages) found Turnitin's AI detection score confirmed enabled and visible to instructors and administrators only, documented first-party in a knowledge-base article last updated Apr 13, 2023. NOT DISQUALIFIED: documented in use, not disabled or recommended against. TWO DEAD LINKS CAUGHT BEFORE CAPTURE: search results twice surfaced the same stale URL pattern — "Academic Misconduct Guide for Instructors" and "UWL Academic Misconduct Process Chp. 14," both under /globalassets/offices-services/student-life/ — and both returned a live HTTP 404 on direct fetch rather than the indexed content; neither is quoted on this page or included in the capture recipe for that reason. The AI-use-syllabus-statement quotation originally planned from the first dead PDF was re-sourced from UWL's live Syllabus Policy page instead. TWO FIDELITY CORRECTIONS: a drafted quotation attributing "Chapter 14 of the UW System code" to UWL's own Academic Misconduct page did not match that page's actual wording ("adapted from UWS Chapter 14" / "UWS Chapter 14," never "UW System code") and was corrected to the page's real phrasing; and the UWS 14 quotation on sanction filing hit the same recurring extraction artifact documented at uwgb and uww — this PDF's column-wrap renders an apostrophe as a literal bracket ("student[s disciplinary file") — so "placed in the student's disciplinary file" is presented as paraphrase rather than a direct quotation at that one clause, consistent with the skill's rule against silently normalizing a source's own punctuation inside quotation marks. CAMPUS-SPECIFIC VALUE ADDED: unlike uwgb's "Misconduct Policies" page, which restates UWS 14's advisor right in general terms, UWL's own "Academic Misconduct" page gives stage-specific advisor rules not spelled out in UWS 14 itself (full participation rights for an advisor only once suspension, expulsion, or criminal charges are on the table) — used as the primary accompaniment quote in preference to the generic UWS 14 "representative" language for that reason. OMBUDS/ADVOCACY CHECKED AND NOT FOUND: UWL's own Faculty Senate page names annually appointed "Ombudspersons," but states they exist to help faculty members with personnel matters (non-renewals, dismissals, grievances) and are explicitly "not 'support' persons" for anyone else — a faculty-only resource, not a student advocate for academic-integrity cases; "None located" used instead, the same disposition reached at uwgb for a differently-shaped trap. Nothing paraphrase-pending. Traces to tools/packets/uwlax-packet.txt with zero failures; gated in tools/fidelity-gate.txt. Archive captures pending — not requested this pass (unattended scheduled run). 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.