Find what applies, distinguish policy from advice, and identify the person who can answer local course, research, privacy, or accessibility questions.
Begin with your goal, place, access, time, budget, and responsibility. Open the original sources, compare realistic options, and confirm details with the people who maintain them.
Is this a binding policy, teaching guide, library guide, syllabus statement, or informal resource?
Who issued it and when was it last reviewed?
Which people, courses, research, data, and decisions does it cover?
Where do assignment-level expectations differ?
Who answers questions, exceptions, accessibility requests, and appeals?
These original and authoritative destinations are annotated so readers know what each contributes, what still requires local confirmation, and when to use it.
U.S. Department of Education
The office provides guidance on education privacy responsibilities for institutions, students, families, vendors, and researchers.
It shapes the privacy, vendor, records, rights, and responsible-office fields in the guidance record.
UNESCO
UNESCO connects institutional AI guidance with human agency, privacy, inclusion, research integrity, and educational purpose.
It shapes the teaching, research, access, and learner-rights comparison criteria.
Sources and requirements can change. Check the publication date, read the original material, and confirm the rules that apply locally before making a consequential decision.
Compare purpose, evidence, local access, cost, privacy, accessibility, support, and current source information before choosing a next step.
A library page, teaching tip, syllabus statement, and board-approved policy do not carry the same authority. Record the owner and scope.
Institutional language rarely answers every disciplinary or assignment question. Students need explicit instructor expectations for allowed use, disclosure, citation, and process evidence.
Check protected student records, research data, confidential partnerships, intellectual property, procurement, accessibility, security, and records requirements.
Record publication and review dates, broken links, conflicts, unresolved questions, responsible offices, and change history.
✓ Starting from a specific learner, organizational, or community goal
✓ Opening original sources and recording the review date
✓ Comparing realistic alternatives before committing time, money, or information
× Treating inclusion as endorsement, approval, or ranking
× Relying on a title or summary without checking the current source
× Choosing a tool or program before considering access, privacy, accessibility, cost, and support
Use the comparison and planning tools while reviewing the original resources linked in the evidence section.
Complete one copy for each serious option, then compare the evidence side by side.
Use before students begin an assignment.
Compare one institutional source with one real course assignment.
Record the institution source and authority.
Mark what the assignment clearly addresses.
Identify contradictions, silence, or ambiguous terms.
Draft student-facing clarification.
Confirm it with the responsible instructor or office.
Could a student comply without guessing or having privileged access to informal explanations?
Share the plan with the people responsible for the work and the people who may be affected. Confirm local rules, protect private information, and name the person who can answer questions or correct a problem.