UVic leaves the answer to the conversation with your supervisor(s) and committee. Its Learning and Teaching guidance for graduate students asks you to consult them about expectations for GenAI use and to make any use transparent, following the disclosure norms of your discipline. The research guidelines of the Office of the Vice-President Research and Innovation (OVPRI) add that you remain accountable for every result and keep personal or confidential research data out of these tools. We found no separate thesis rule from Graduate Studies on November 9, 2026, and neither page is dated.
If your AI statement clearly doesn't cover what you describe elsewhere in your thesis, Esmond points it out.
The graduate page from Learning and Teaching Innovation (LTI) opens its list of dos with the conversation: “consult with your supervisor(s) and committee about expectations for GenAI use”. Its next item covers disclosure: “make GenAI use transparent in academic work, following disciplinary norms for disclosure”.
The page frames these as expectations of heightened responsibility for graduate students, especially in research. It does not list permitted or banned uses, though it asks you to consider recommendations to use university-approved GenAI tools. Under its first principle it speaks of using GenAI if permission is granted, so the practical reading is that your supervisor(s) and committee set the terms for your thesis.
A hypothetical example of a commentYour methods chapter says the interview transcripts never left a secure drive, yet your acknowledgments thank a GenAI tool for help coding them. Where did the transcripts go?
A first comment on one part of your own draft, right away and without an account.
Get a free previewLTI applies five principles to graduate use of GenAI. The right-hand column is our reading for a thesis, not UVic's text.
| Principle | What LTI says, in short | What to check in your thesis |
|---|---|---|
| Respect | If permission is granted, use GenAI in ways that protect your integrity and attribute original knowledge keepers accurately | Whether you have the permission, and whether each source idea is credited to a person |
| Relationships | Talk with supervisors, committees, and communities about GenAI | Whether your committee knows what you used |
| Relevancy | Keep inquiry grounded in the communities and methods you answer to | Whether tool output fits your method and setting |
| Responsibility | Check GenAI-assisted work rigorously and protect sensitive data | Which passages and data passed through a tool, and how you checked them |
| Reciprocity | Share well-attributed insights back to your scholarly and community contexts | Whether readers can tell what came from where |
UVic's page is specific about one kind of material. It asks you to treat ethical use as paramount where data sovereignty, Indigenous knowledge, and community-based information are involved, and to “follow appropriate protocols to prevent input of confidential, sensitive, or community-owned data into GenAI tools”. For a thesis built on community partnerships or interviews, that means the agreements you made with participants and communities also govern what goes into a tool.
The OVPRI guidelines explain the risk: “Material uploaded into generative AI tools may not have adequate privacy protections and in some cases may be used for other purposes, including the training of new models.” With few exceptions, they say, no personal information or confidential research data should be uploaded. OVPRI points to Microsoft 365 Copilot, which the UVic Privacy Office has approved, for cases where data security is a concern, and to the Privacy Office for other services.
OVPRI asks researchers for full transparency about the role of these tools, and says what that involves: “Best practices require full transparency about what tool or tools have been used, and when and how they have been used.” It also asks researchers to disclose known limitations or biases of the tools.
Accountability stays with you: “It is entirely incumbent on the researchers using these tools to ensure the validity, accuracy, and truthfulness of their work, regardless of the tools or resources used in its development.” OVPRI notes that citation standards for GenAI are still changing, mentions early recommendations from MLA and Chicago, and leaves it to you to follow the current version. For articles from your thesis, the journal's own rules apply.
LTI states that UVic has chosen not to use plagiarism detection tools, citing how they collect and store student information and intellectual property, and that instructors may not use GenAI tools to assess student work or decide whether a student breached the Academic Integrity Policy. For a thesis, this puts more weight on your own record: the agreement with your committee and an honest disclosure are what show how you worked.
This example is made up. A master's student in education interviews twelve teachers from a partner school district, under an ethics approval that keeps transcripts on a secure university drive. Her committee agreed she could use GenAI to suggest initial codes. She pastes de-identified excerpts into a public chatbot, then lists the tool in her acknowledgments. The committee had agreed to the use, but not to where the data went, and the UVic guidance asks graduate students to prevent sensitive data from going into tools. A university-approved tool, or a check with her committee and the Privacy Office first, would have matched both the permission and the protocols.
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 from within your field. You can read how Esmond works and open a sample report. Under UVic's guidance, a review by an AI tool is a GenAI use to agree on with your supervisor(s) and committee, and to disclose following your discipline's norms if you go ahead. Esmond is not a university-approved tool, so raise that in the same conversation. Because UVic asks you to keep confidential, sensitive, and community-owned data out of these tools, check what your draft contains and read the Privacy Notice before you upload. The University of Victoria has not reviewed or approved Esmond.
We found no ban. The graduate guidance asks you to consult your supervisor(s) and committee about expectations for GenAI use and to make any use transparent.
LTI asks you to follow the disclosure norms of your discipline. OVPRI adds that best practice names the tool, when it was used, and how, plus its known limitations or biases.
UVic's research guidelines say that, with few exceptions, no personal information or confidential research data should be uploaded. Check your ethics approval and ask the Privacy Office about specific tools.
OVPRI notes that Microsoft 365 Enterprise Copilot has been approved for use by the UVic Privacy Office, used through your UVic account.
Read on November 9, 2026.
Get your paper evaluated before you submit