Only after your supervisor and supervisory committee agree in writing. The University of Windsor's guidance on generative AI for graduate students, reviewed by members of the Graduate Council of the Faculty of Graduate Studies, says AI use in research and scholarly work needs explicit written approval first, and that any editing done through AI is declared in the thesis. Its FAQ applies the thesis rule to undergraduate theses and major papers too. The page carries no date; we read it on November 9, 2026.
If your AI statement clearly doesn't cover what you describe elsewhere in your thesis, Esmond points it out.
The FAQ answers the approval question with a yes and one sentence: “Graduate students must seek explicit written approval from their supervisor and supervisory committee before using AI in their research and scholarly work.” If you or your supervisor are unsure about a use, Windsor points you to the Chair, the Associate Dean (Graduate), or the Faculty of Graduate Studies.
In practice: ask your supervisor first, before you use Esmond or any other AI tool for your thesis, and keep the written answer with your thesis records.
The guidance also explains why it takes this route. It calls a ban on these technologies in graduate studies impractical and unenforceable, and does not recommend one. AI may augment graduate research, but under the Graduate Degree Level Expectations it should not replace the original scholarship a thesis is meant to show.
A hypothetical example of a commentYour thesis declares no AI editing, yet the tracked changes in chapter 3 show dozens of rephrasings accepted from the AI suggestions in your word processor. Should those be declared?
A first comment on one part of your own draft, right away and without an account.
Get a free previewOne FAQ answer separates research from writing. A supervisory team that accepts AI in your methods may still restrict it in papers or the thesis, and Windsor says you must seek and document approval for AI in writing even when you already have approval for research. Another answer adds that this guidance covers all theses and major papers, at the graduate and the undergraduate level.
| Use in your thesis | What the FAQ says | What to do |
|---|---|---|
| AI suggestions built into common software you work in | Generally OK | Declare the AI editing in the thesis |
| Specialized tools that produce long-form academic text with minimal input from you | Generally not acceptable | Raise it with your supervisor before any use |
| AI in research methods or data analysis | Explicit written approval | Describe it as part of your methodology |
| AI in the text, after approval for research | Its own approval | Ask again and keep the reply |
| AI feedback on your draft | Students may choose it, alongside human feedback | Agreement in writing first, as for any AI use in the thesis |
Windsor raises this in its FAQ on feedback: “Students should be cautious about the intellectual property and data security implications of providing parts of their academic writing to third parties, including AI companies, and supervisors should never do so without the student's consent.”
Elsewhere on the page, Windsor says most commercial AI companies allow user data to be retained and used to develop their products, and that confidential, private, or commercially sensitive data should not go to third-party tools that have not had a privacy, security, and accessibility review. In the same answer on feedback, it says students may choose AI feedback as part of the process of drafting, combined with human feedback. Both points hold together: the option is yours, and so is the decision about where your unpublished chapters end up.
Windsor treats AI as part of your method. The FAQ calls acknowledging digital assistance best practice, asks you to describe generative AI tools as part of the methodology or analytical tools in the research, and expects you to be ready to discuss and defend the choice to use them. Any editing done through AI is declared in the written thesis, including edits that came from suggestions in everyday software. For citation formats, the page points to the Leddy Library guide to AI for students.
The consequence is stated next to the rule: “Failure to seek or receive this approval may be considered academic misconduct and may result in sanctions under the appropriate by-laws and Student Code of Conduct.”
The FAQ adds a distinction. Windsor does not consider the use of generative AI to fit its definition of plagiarism, which involves representing another person's work as your own. Representing AI-generated content as your own intellectual work, though, may be considered academic or research misconduct.
This example is made up. An undergraduate in environmental science, finishing an honours thesis, accepts AI suggestions in his word processor while revising, and separately pastes two chapters into a general chatbot for comments. His supervisor never received a request for either. The word-processor edits are the kind Windsor calls generally OK, but they still need a declaration in the thesis. The chatbot use needed written agreement first, and it also placed two chapters of unpublished work with an AI company, the case the FAQ cautions about.
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 your thesis draft and points out factual errors, inconsistencies, and blind spots, judged against the standards of your field. You can see how Esmond works and a sample report. Uploading a draft to Esmond means providing part of your academic writing to a third party that is an AI company, which is exactly the case Windsor's guidance asks you to be cautious about. It is also AI use in the development of your thesis. So ask your supervisor and committee first and get their agreement in writing, and read the Privacy Notice before you upload, to see what happens to your text. If you go ahead, declare the use in the thesis. The University of Windsor has not reviewed or approved Esmond.
No. The guidance calls a ban impractical and does not recommend one. It requires explicit written approval from your supervisor and supervisory committee before you use AI in research and scholarly work.
The FAQ says common tools with built-in suggestions are generally OK, while specialized tools that produce long-form academic text with minimal input are generally not acceptable. Any editing done through AI should be declared in the thesis.
Yes. The FAQ says the guidance on AI in a thesis or major paper applies at the graduate and the undergraduate level.
Windsor says supervisors should never provide parts of a student's academic writing to third parties, including AI companies, without the student's consent.
Read on November 9, 2026.
Get your paper evaluated before you submit