Plagiarism and AI at WGU: everything you submit is kept

The short answer

At WGU every performance assessment is scanned, and a copy of everything you submit is kept so it cannot be reused. There is no opt-out.

AI is written into the definition of academic integrity itself — while WGU simultaneously licenses Grammarly to every student. The line is drawn by your task instructions.

Everything you submit is stored

This is the single clearest retention statement we have found at any university in this series:

“WGU will store a copy of all submitted work to prevent its use in future submissions.”

No opt-out is offered — no equivalent of Toronto’s or Waterloo’s right to an alternative. The purpose is stated plainly and is reasonable: to stop the same work being handed in twice, by you or by anyone else.

There is one accommodation, and it is on your side to take:

“To protect each student’s identity, WGU encourages (but does not require) students to remove all personally identifiable information, such as phone numbers and addresses, from each submission.”

Take the suggestion. If a copy of your work is going to be kept indefinitely, there is no reason for your phone number to be kept with it. Strip contact details from cover pages before you submit.

Capstones are treated separately and consensually: “Students may consent to have their capstone work archived for restricted view by other students and alumni.” That one you choose.

The practical consequence of the retention rule is one students trip over constantly: you cannot reuse your own work. WGU’s intellectual-property clauses forbid reusing a capstone from another degree, and prohibit sharing responses, “including uploading work on tutoring websites or social media”.

The Similarity Checker

WGU names a tool but not a vendor. From the Academic Integrity policy:

“Students must only submit files that WGU can scan through the Similarity Checker unless indicated otherwise by the task directions. Students should only submit handwritten documents and pictures during an Evaluation if the task directions specifically call for submission of that file type.”

Note the practical instruction hidden in there: submit machine-readable files. A photographed or scanned document that the checker cannot read is a problem in itself unless the task asked for one.

Which product sits behind “Similarity Checker” is not published anywhere in the catalog. Turnitin, Copyleaks and Unicheck appear nowhere in it. We are not going to guess. What a similarity score does and does not show is covered in what a similarity score actually means.

No student self-check route is documented — the checker is described as something WGU scans submissions through, not something you run on a draft.

AI is in the definition itself

Many universities bolt AI on through guidance. WGU put it in the definition:

“Academic Integrity means the ethical completion of WGU coursework. Examples include appropriately attributing text, pictures, tables, and graphs used in coursework to the creators and each student completing their own coursework, including not submitting work generated by artificial intelligence (AI) as the student’s own work.”

And the operative rule for assessments:

“Unless official WGU instructions direct otherwise, assessments and projects must be the student’s own individual work. Students shall not engage in unauthorized Collaborative Efforts […] This includes working with other students or inappropriately using content generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools unless official WGU instructions direct otherwise. If specific task or course instructions do not address use of AI, students should defer to the Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools policy.”

So there is a hierarchy: your task instructions first, and WGU’s separate AI policy where they are silent. That is a cleaner fallback than most universities offer — several in this series simply leave silence ambiguous.

The policy applies “to all WGU students regardless of location”, and the general attribution duty is broad: “If students use material from any appropriate source, the student must provide attribution to that source.” No prescribed AI disclosure form is published in the catalog; our AI disclosure statement guide covers what a good acknowledgement contains.

The Grammarly tension

Worth stating plainly, because it confuses people. WGU’s software requirements list, for all students:

“Grammarly for Education - using the license provided by WGU for all students.”

So the university buys you the tool — and separately prohibits “inappropriately using content generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools”. Both are true at once, and the resolution is the word inappropriately.

The safe reading, consistent with how other universities in this series draw it: corrections to spelling, grammar and punctuation are what the licence is for; accepting generated or substantially rewritten content is what the policy prohibits. If a suggestion changes what your text says rather than how it reads, decline it. And where the generative features can be switched off, switching them off removes the question entirely.

Because WGU is competency-based, this matters more than it would elsewhere: “All students must demonstrate competency in their own work.” The assessment exists to show that you can do the thing.

Sanctions, and what stays forever

Violations are treated under the Student Code of Conduct as “cheating”, “subject to sanctions up to and including expulsion from WGU”. WGU may also “block student access to assessment scheduling or task submission while an investigation […] is underway”.

The published ladder runs: a Level 1 Warning; a Level 2 Warning with an improvement plan and “the probability of more severe sanctions” for any repeat; loss of privileges; restitution; discretionary sanctions; disciplinary suspension; removal from the academic programme; disciplinary expulsion; “revocation of transcript grades and/or assessment results”; revocation of admission or degree; and withholding a degree.

Note the escalation-skipping clause: “Certain behaviors, such as proxy cheating, are considered egregious violations of the Code and may warrant expulsion without prior warnings or remediation opportunities.” Having someone else sit an assessment for you does not get a warning first.

Then the record, which is where WGU differs most:

“Documentation of disciplinary expulsion, removal from an academic program, or revocation or withholding of a degree are part of the Student’s permanent Academic Record. Documentation of other disciplinary sanctions shall not be part of the Student’s permanent Education Record but shall become part of the Student’s Disciplinary Record.”

And: “WGU will keep the record of a suspended or expelled Student indefinitely.” The good news in that quotation is the second sentence of the first quote — lesser sanctions stay in a disciplinary file rather than on your academic record.

There is also an Administrative Hold that “will prevent a Student from registering in additional courses, receiving transcripts, or obtaining a degree”, and an interim suspension power.

Process and appeal

A Student Conduct Officer decides whether to charge and issues a charge letter with the supporting evidence. A virtual administrative hearing follows, at which you represent yourself. An advisor may attend but “advisors can attend but may not speak or participate directly in any Hearing”, and “must be a member of the WGU Community and may not be acting in the capacity of an attorney.”

The standard is preponderance of the evidence — “it is more likely than not that the Accused Student committed the violation(s) as alleged”.

Escalation and appeal are both 5 business days, and both are narrow. You may petition for a Student Conduct Board hearing on two grounds only: new information that was not discoverable earlier, or non-conformance with published procedures including discrimination or conflict of interest. An appeal to the Appellate Board is limited to the record and to those same two grounds. “If the Appellate Board denies an appeal, the decisions and any sanctions […] shall be final and binding on all parties.”

Read that carefully: disagreeing with the finding is not a ground. The hearing is where the substance is decided, so bring your drafts and your working record to it. See how to prove you wrote it yourself and what to do when you are accused.

If a detector score is what started this, our guide to an AI detector flagging your thesis sets out what that number does and does not establish on its own.

One useful protection for new students: where “a task is subject to an Academic Integrity evaluation, a case-by-case determination may occur on whether the submission will count” towards first-term progress requirements.

What we could not read

Three honest limits, so you know what this page does and does not cover.

WGU’s dedicated AI policy is not readable from outside. The catalog points to a “Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools” policy in the Student Policy Handbook, but that host blocks automated retrieval. Whatever it says about detection, disclosure or permitted uses is unread by us, not absent. You can read it from inside; do, because it is the document the catalog defers to when your task instructions are silent.

There is no published position on AI-writing detection. The catalog names only a Similarity Checker and says nothing about an AI indicator either way. So we cannot tell you whether one runs. Whatever the answer, the same caution applies to every such tool including ours: our published error rates are measured on English and German corpora, and no detector produces proof — how accurate AI detectors really are.

The catalog disclaims itself.“All information in the Institutional Catalog is provided for information purposes only and is subject to change without prior notice.” And there is a naming inconsistency worth knowing: the Code of Conduct refers to violations of the “Academic Authenticity Policy”, while the catalog’s policy is titled “Academic Integrity”, and no policy of the former name is printed in the September 2026 catalog. If a case turns on which document applies, ask.

Before you submit

• Strip personal details from your submissions. A copy is kept, and WGU encourages you to remove them.
• Never reuse your own earlier work, including a capstone from another degree.
• Read the task instructions on AI first, then the AI Tools policy if they are silent. That hierarchy is stated.
• Use Grammarly for corrections, not for content. Turn off generative features where you can.
• Submit machine-readable files unless the task asks for something else.
• Do not post your work to tutoring sites or social media. That is separately prohibited.

If you want a read on your own text before you hand it in, our AI check is free up to 1,500 words, with no account and no name.

Sources

• Western Governors University: Institutional Catalog, September 2026 — Volume MMXXVI, No. 9; page footers stamped 25 August 2026. Contains the Academic Integrity policy and the Student Code of Conduct.
• Western Governors University: Institutional Catalog index.
• Western Governors University: Student Policy Handbook — “Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools” policy, referenced by the catalog; not publicly retrievable.

This page is orientation, not legal advice. What binds you is your task instructions and WGU’s published policies.