Does your UK university use Turnitin’s AI indicator?
The switch sits with the institution. Turnitin’s own FAQ on its AI writing detection says administrators “have the option to enable/disable the AI writing feature from their admin settings page”. That option did not exist at first. According to the University of Glasgow’s April 2023 staff update, Turnitin made opting out possible on 29 March 2023, “after lobbying by a number of expert groups from across UK universities”. Greenwich says its own opt-out was made “in collaboration with many other UK institutions supported by sector bodies such as UCISA and Jisc”.
The table below is built only from each university’s own published page or PDF, every one read on 26 September 2026. Of the 15 institutions listed, 10 have published a decision not to use the indicator and 5 say they use it. That split describes the universities whose position we could read and date; Abertay’s date comes only from its page metadata, as its row says. It is not a sample of the sector, and it says nothing about the many universities that publish no position at all.
| University | Published position | In its own words | Document dated |
|---|---|---|---|
| University of Greenwich | Opted out | “At present, we will not be implementing Turnitin’s AI detection tool as the possibility of affecting student outcomes is unknown.” | 31 March 2023 |
| University of Glasgow | Opted out | “Along with most other Russell Group universities, UofG has decided to take up this opt out, at least for the moment.” | April 2023 (staff update) |
| Bournemouth University | Opted out at launch | Introducing it “at this time would not be fair or appropriate for either staff or students.” | 13 April 2023 |
| Aberystwyth University | Switched off from 30 September 2023 | Cited “a high incidence of false positives and the anxiety that this induces for students.” | 27 September 2023 |
| University of Reading | Turned off | “Turnitin’s facility to detect AI use is turned off due its low reliability and the risk of false accusations of misconduct.” | V1.0, November 2023 |
| King’s College London | Not enabled | Chose “not to enable the AI detection % in Turnitin due to concerns about its reliability and potential for false positives.” | First published October 2023, updated April 2025 |
| University of Liverpool | Piloted from September 2023, switched off from 1 August 2024 | Its “pilot study has also highlighted a lower-than-expected level of reliability.” | 18 July 2024 |
| University of Birmingham | Not enabled; staff may not use any AI detector | “Like many other institutions across the higher education sector, we have not currently enabled this feature.” No student work “should be uploaded to generative AI detection software.” | July 2023, updated January 2025 (its own next review was due July 2025) |
| University of St Andrews | Not switched on | Not “switched on at the University of St Andrews due to concerns over accurate detection.” | Approved 28 January 2025 |
| University of Strathclyde | Not permitted | The university “does not endorse or permit the use of Turnitin AI Checker (or any other tools or services claiming to detect the use of Gen-AI).” | v2.0, effective August 2025 |
| Northumbria University | Enabled; tutors see the report | “The AI writing detector does not decide if academic misconduct has occurred.” | March 2024 |
| University of Bristol | In use; reports are supporting evidence only | Results “should always be reviewed by subject experts and used as supporting evidence, not as a replacement for academic judgement.” | 20 November 2025 |
| Birkbeck, University of London | Enabled; flags checked against your AI declaration | “Academic staff use the Turnitin originality (AI) checker which flags AI use in an assessment.” | 2025–26 guidance, latest update April 2026 |
| Leeds Beckett University | Enabled; staff-only results | “The indicator should be used for guidance only, not as a final judgement.” | Updated 28 July 2026 |
| Abertay University | Enabled; never the sole evidence | “At Abertay, we are using Turnitin’s AI Writing Indicator.” It “must not be used as the sole evidential basis for a misconduct decision.” | Page metadata: modified September 2026 (no visible date) |
Read the dates before the positions. A 2023 statement is what that university said in 2023; Glasgow’s own wording was “at least for the moment”. Where a row shows an older document, treat it as the published position as of that date and check your university’s current pages, or ask your programme office, before relying on it. Bristol shows why. Its undated key messages on AI asked education directors to review Turnitin AI writing detection in their area and “decide whether to persist with its use until the next university checkpoint at the end of 24/25”. That checkpoint has passed and we found no published outcome from it, so Bristol’s row rests on the November 2025 staff update instead. Four universities we tried are missing for a reason: Dundee’s guide refused direct requests, UCL’s pages could not be read at all, and neither Brunel’s page nor the University of East Anglia’s AI policy carried a date we could confirm.
The same pattern runs outside the UK, and our answer on which universities disabled Turnitin’s AI detector covers the US and Australian decisions. For what the indicator measures and the figures Turnitin publishes about it, see our Turnitin AI detection explainer; none of that changes by country.
What the sector bodies say
The Russell Group’s principles on generative AI in education, published on 3 July 2023, set out five commitments. The fourth is that “Universities will ensure academic rigour and integrity is upheld”, and under it the principles document (PDF) says all 24 of its members “have reviewed their academic conduct policies and guidance to reflect the emergence of generative AI”. The document does not mention detection software at all, so it neither endorses Turnitin’s indicator nor rules it out.
QAA, the sector’s quality body, told providers in May 2023 that detecting AI use is difficult; our page on who regulates AI detection in UK universities covers what QAA, the OfS and the OIA each do. We would quote Jisc here too. Its guidance pages served us an automated bot challenge on 26 September 2026, and we do not quote a document we have not read.
What happens after a flag at a UK university
A Turnitin flag starts a process; it does not finish one. Your university applies its own academic misconduct regulations, which usually means an investigation or a meeting, then a panel if the matter goes further, then an internal appeal on the grounds those regulations allow. At a provider in England or Wales, the last internal decision comes with a Completion of Procedures letter, and the OIA’s Rule 8 gives you 12 months from its date to complain to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator. Glasgow, St Andrews, Strathclyde and Abertay are Scottish, so their students go instead to the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman, which says it looks at complaints only after the university’s own complaints procedure is finished. Our guide to appealing an AI accusation at a UK university sets out each stage and the deadline in detail.
The universities that use the indicator say, in writing, that it cannot carry a case on its own. Abertay says it “must not be used as the sole evidential basis for a misconduct decision”. Birkbeck tells students that staff compare a flag against the use of AI the assessment brief permits and against your AI declaration, and only “if the flag does not match the permitted use” may they refer the work on. Turnitin’s own guide to the AI Writing Report says the report “should not be used as the sole basis for adverse actions against a student”. If a panel is treating the percentage as the whole case, those sentences are worth quoting back to it, and our guide for students who have been falsely accused of using AI covers the evidence that carries more weight.
Can UK students see their AI score?
Not through Turnitin itself. Turnitin’s FAQ states that “the AI writing detection indicator and report are not visible to students”, and adds that instructors can download the report as a PDF and share it. UK universities describe the same arrangement from their side:
- Abertay says you “cannot view the AI Writing Indicator or report directly in Turnitin, including after submission”, that this is set by Turnitin’s product configuration rather than by Abertay, and that a student whose case is escalated to a Student Academic Disciplinary Panel receives a screenshot of the score and report as evidence.
- Northumbria says only tutors can view the report, but that a tutor may download it and share it “if they feel it is appropriate”.
- Bristol told staff in August 2025 about a new AI writing score column in the Turnitin assignment inbox, visible only to instructors.
- Leeds Beckett states that “only staff see the results” of the AI writing check.
So the practical answer depends on where you are, and on whether a case has been opened. If it has, ask in writing for the report the allegation relies on, since a tutor can download and share it. Abertay’s guidance shows one university building that disclosure into its panel process.
Where your submission is stored
Turnitin’s own terms point to the United States. Its Services Privacy Policy (last updated 4 February 2026, read on 26 September 2026) tells anyone outside the US that their personal information “will be transferred to and processed in the United States”. The same paragraph offers EU institutions one alternative: “it may be possible to store Submissions exclusively in Germany”. It describes no UK-only equivalent, and the UK is named there only as one of the places where support staff may handle data. Turnitin’s End-User License Agreement points the same way in Section A, the part written for users outside the EU, which includes UK students: papers and personal data “may be submitted to and may be stored on its servers located in the United States”. The policy also says its processing is governed by the contract with the customer, which is your university, so its data protection officer can tell you what was agreed for your institution.
The licence nearly changed in summer 2026. The University of Sussex told staff that Turnitin had planned a new EULA for 14 July 2026 with terms on processing student submissions using AI tools, paused it after “swift and coordinated intervention from sector bodies”, and confirmed on 23 July that there would be no EULA updates during the 2026/27 academic year. Aberystwyth’s 22 September 2026 update says the proposal would have used student submissions and staff feedback to train large language models, that it lobbied against the change alongside UCISA, and that it is continuing to use Turnitin under a contract running to July 2027. How the student paper repository works, and what you can ask to have removed, is in our post on whether Turnitin stores your papers.
Where we stand
HumanFlow makes money from an AI detector and a humanizer, and that interest is worth keeping in mind as you read. Our detector is a separate model from Turnitin’s, so its score is no preview of the number your tutor sees. It checks English text only. If your university asks you to declare AI use, declare it: rewriting a text does not change that obligation, and at Birkbeck the declaration is literally what a flag is checked against.
None of this is legal advice. If a misconduct case has been opened, start with your students’ union advice service, which is free to use. We quoted each university from its own document, and the four universities we could not read or date are named above rather than guessed at.