At the University of Alabama (UA), your graduate program sets how much generative AI you may use, and if you use any, you must disclose it. The Graduate School's guidance from December 2025 covers committee-based exams, projects, theses, and dissertations. It leaves the limits to departments and committees, so the answer for your thesis depends on what your program has decided.
One requirement applies to every student who uses AI: “A thorough disclosure of how generative AI was used in the exam/project/thesis/dissertation process is required of all students who submit generative-AI-integrated work.” UA then asks each graduate program to set its own parameters on what is allowed, so your first question is whether your program has done that yet.
The guidance also states the risk: “Unauthorized use of generative AI tools for scholarly work may be considered an offense under UA’s Academic Misconduct Policy and/or Research Misconduct Policy.”
UA gives examples that programs can use or adapt. They show how far apart two programs at the same university can be.
| Example statement | What it permits | What it rules out or adds |
|---|---|---|
| Limited use | Brainstorming, first bibliographic searches, graphics, and editing | Entire paragraphs from a tool aren't allowed; a disclosure statement goes in the opening pages |
| Data and computation | Data analysis, computation, and research | You fact-check and answer for all AI-generated content |
| Code | Developing and debugging code | You must explain and justify your coding decisions and document the assistance |
| No use | Nothing, at any phase | Using such tools in the research, drafting, or revision counts as academic misconduct |
The guidance defines generative AI broadly. Its examples of AI-integrated work include brainstorming, an initial literature review, developing a theoretical framework, designing a methodology, data analysis, transcription and coding, graphics, audio, code, translation, and revision for style or accuracy. The list also includes generating full paragraphs or chapters.
It doesn't say which of these are permitted, since that is for your program. If what you did appears on the list, count it as something to disclose.
The guidance says the form of the statement should be agreed between you and your faculty at the start of the project. It offers a sample structure: a sentence naming the tool with its version or date and its provider, and a sentence on what it was used for. One of its example program statements places the disclosure in the opening pages, so confirm the location with your committee. UA also expects publication outlets to ask for such a statement, which is one more reason to keep accurate records from the start.
UA ties responsibility to the defense: “Regardless of the process used to compose the document, students are responsible for the full content of the document and are expected to demonstrate, in the oral defense, their ability to engage with the concepts and evidence provided in the document.” Before your defense, go back to each passage, figure, and analysis a tool touched, and make sure you can explain it and say where the evidence comes from.
This example is made up. Two master's students in one department both use a tool for transcription and first-pass coding. One committee has documented a variation that allows this. The other follows the department's statement, which doesn't mention it. The first student discloses the use and continues with the analysis. The second has to ask before going further, and may have to redo the coding by hand. UA says such variation is permissible but should be documented, which is why the question belongs in an email at the start.
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.
UA's list of AI-integrated work includes revision for style, organization, and clarity. Esmond comments on a draft and leaves the revising to you, and whether comments from an AI tool count in your program is a question for your committee. UA's list of approved and prohibited AI tools applies to any tool, Esmond included, so check it first. UA has not reviewed or approved Esmond.
Your committee may want to see how Esmond works and the sample report. For your own question, see whether you can use Esmond.
The Graduate School doesn't ban it across the board. It asks each program to set limits, and one of its example statements rules out all use. Check what your program adopted.
UA's definition mentions tools that generate substantive content beyond basic grammar and spelling correction. Ask your committee about anything in between, and about revision tools in particular.
Ask your advisor and committee, and keep the answer. UA says guidance to students should come as early as possible in the research or exam preparation.
Yes. The guidance covers qualifying, comprehensive, and candidacy exams along with projects, theses, and dissertations.
Read on November 4, 2026.
Esmond is not taking orders on this site yet.