You can, as long as nothing is hidden. The Illinois State Graduate School's Statement on Ethical Use of AI asks students to disclose all generative AI use to their committee, to cite it in the style manual of their discipline, and to confirm with the committee that the use fits the standards of their school or department. The statement covers theses, dissertations, capstones and comprehensive exams. It is undated, and we read it on November 9, 2026; schools and departments may add their own restrictions.
If your AI statement clearly doesn't cover what you describe elsewhere in your thesis, Esmond points it out.
The Graduate School's position is a single statement on its thesis and dissertation pages. It opens by saying generative AI can support innovative scholarship within guidelines that may vary by discipline, and then sets the duty that matters most for a thesis: “All use of generative AI in the thesis/dissertation/capstone/comprehensive exam process must be disclosed to the student’s committee by the student.”
Three more obligations follow. The student and the committee together check that the use fits the standards of the discipline and the school or department. The use is cited according to the style manual of the discipline. And the student is responsible for knowing and following any extra rules of the school or department, and for asking the department or the Graduate School when in doubt.
The statement does not require approval before you use a tool, and it does not list uses that are always out. It relies on disclosure and on the committee's judgment of what fits the field.
A hypothetical example of a commentYour research question asks about first-generation students, but the sample section says you could not identify first-generation status in the survey data. How does chapter 5 answer the question without that variable?
A first comment on one part of your own draft, right away and without an account.
Get a free previewIllinois State is explicit that disclosure runs in two directions: “transparency around the usage of generative AI is required between the student, their committee and school/department, as well as the student and the audience of their completed thesis/dissertation, capstone, and/or comprehensive exams.”
In practice that means two separate records. The committee hears about each use while the work is in progress, in a meeting, an email or a note with a chapter draft. The finished document then tells its readers, through a citation in your discipline's style and, where your style manual or committee asks for one, a statement in the front matter or the methods. A conversation with your committee does not replace the citation, and a citation added at the end does not replace telling the committee earlier.
The same rule applies across the four culminating formats the Graduate School names. How the disclosure looks in each depends on the format, so the right column is our reading, not Graduate School text.
| Format | Disclosure to the committee | Disclosure to readers (our reading) |
|---|---|---|
| Thesis | All generative AI use | Citation in the discipline's style, plus any statement your committee wants |
| Dissertation | All generative AI use | The same, chapter by chapter where uses differ |
| Capstone | All generative AI use | Citation in the capstone document or product |
| Comprehensive exam | All generative AI use in the exam process | Ask your committee how they want it recorded |
The Graduate School statement sets the minimum. Schools and departments may add policies, guidance or restrictions, and the statement places the duty to find and follow them on the student. We found no Illinois State department text for this page, so check these places yourself:
Research and Sponsored Programs issued recommendations on generative AI in research and scholarship on December 18, 2023. They start from a plain fact about status: “There is currently no University Policy governing the use of generative AI in research and scholarship”, which is why the office offers guidance. For graduate work, its summary line reads: “When incorporating AI into thesis, dissertation, capstone, and comprehensive exams, always align with your committee’s guidelines on AI usage”.
The recommendations add points that apply to thesis research. You are responsible for the accuracy of anything a tool produced, including references, since tools have produced false ones. The office warns that tools may lack privacy policies that protect research data, in particular protected health information, personal information, FERPA-covered records and proprietary information, and says these types of data should not be entered into a generative AI tool without consulting the appropriate university authorities in Purchasing. Whether your own draft counts as research data in that sense is not settled by these texts, so ask your advisor before you upload it to Esmond or any tool the university has not approved. Journals have their own rules on reporting AI use, so a chapter you plan to publish may need a second statement.
The Graduate School statement names the consequence: use of generative AI that was not authorized may be treated as a violation of Policy 1.8, the university's policy on integrity in research, scholarly and creative activities. The statement does not define what counts as unauthorized. Asking your committee about each use, and keeping their answers, leaves no use they did not know about.
This example is made up. A master's student in kinesiology uses an AI tool to get comments on the coherence of her literature review. She mentions it to her committee chair in an email, and the chair has no objection. The final thesis contains no citation and no statement about the tool. The committee was informed, which meets the first half of the transparency the Graduate School asks for. The readers of the completed thesis were not, which leaves the second half open. A short citation in her discipline's style, agreed with the chair, would have covered both.
Esmond evaluates every assignment before you submit. It never writes it.
Esmond is an AI tool that doesn't write for you. If your course doesn't allow any AI tools, don't use Esmond for that work. If you're unsure, ask your instructor or advisor.
Esmond evaluates the content of a draft from within your field and points out factual errors, inconsistencies and blind spots; how Esmond works and the sample report show what comes back. Under the Graduate School statement, using Esmond on a thesis, dissertation or capstone is generative AI use like any other: tell your committee, check with them that it fits your department's standards, and cite it in your discipline's style in the finished document. Whether your draft counts as research data under the research office's recommendation is not settled by these texts, so ask your advisor about that before you upload it. Look for a school or department rule first, and see whether you can use Esmond for the general question. Illinois State University has not reviewed or approved Esmond.
No. The Graduate School statement allows generative AI use within the standards of the discipline, with disclosure to the committee and a citation. Departments may add restrictions.
The statement asks you to disclose all use to your committee and to confirm with them that it fits your department's standards. It does not set a separate approval step, but your department can.
Following the style manual your discipline uses, such as APA or MLA. Ask your committee whether they also want a statement in the document.
Yes. The Graduate School statement covers theses, dissertations, capstones and comprehensive exams.
Read on November 9, 2026.
Get your paper evaluated before you submit