At National College of Ireland (NCI), an AI Acknowledgement Supplement goes with every submission, and disclosing a use of generative AI does not by itself make that use acceptable: it still has to fit what your module or assessment permits. That is the position in NCI's policy on the Acceptable Use of Generative AI in Teaching, Learning and Assessment, which is published as a draft (V1.0) with no approval date filled in. Here is what it says, checked 22 October 2026.
Used AI? If your AI declaration clearly doesn’t cover the use you describe elsewhere in your text, Esmond points it out.
Try the free previewYou get a free preview first. You only pay if you want the full review.
The policy sits on the NCI Support Hub. Its header gives the version as V1.0 (Draft), names Academic Council as the approval body and the Registrar as executive owner, and leaves the fields for the approval date, the effective date and the next review blank. The page was last updated on 20 October 2026. Because the text is still labelled as a draft, its wording may change before it is approved, so check the current version through your programme.
The policy applies to all forms of assessment. It has no separate section on the dissertation, so what follows applies to your final project or dissertation in the same way as to a shorter assignment.
A fictional example of a commentYour conclusion says the measure works, but your interviews mainly show how staff experience it. Could you limit the conclusion to what your data can show?
Upload your PDF and the free preview shows you a first comment on part of your text, no account needed. You only pay if you want the full review.
Try the free previewThe central requirement is a form. Students complete the AI Acknowledgement Supplement and attach it to any submission, and the policy adds a point that is easy to miss: "Where GenAI use is prohibited for an assessment, the AI Acknowledgement Supplement, must confirm that no GenAI assistance was used." Even when an assessment allows no AI at all, you still hand in the supplement, this time to state that you used none.
Each module descriptor is meant to say whether GenAI may be used in its assessments and on what conditions. If you cannot find that statement for your dissertation module, ask your lecturer or supervisor early, not in the week you hand in.
The policy keeps apart two questions that students often blur: "Disclosure does not automatically make a use acceptable. Disclosed GenAI use must still comply with what is permitted for that module or assessment." A full and honest supplement does not cover a use your module did not allow.
It defines substantive use broadly, as any use that contributes to the content, structure, argument, analysis, code or expression of a piece of work, and if you are unsure whether a use counts, the policy tells you to disclose it. Among the uses it does not permit without explicit authorisation are letting a tool supply the substantive ideas, argument or critical evaluation of your work, and citing AI output as a source. GenAI, the policy states, is not an author.
The same list includes uploading student work, personal data or confidential information to non-approved GenAI platforms, and the policy says NCI will publish a registry of approved GenAI tools. Until that registry exists, ask your lecturer before you upload a draft to any AI tool, Esmond included.
The Library's Student Guide on the Use of AI in Teaching and Learning (last updated 8 July 2026) explains how this works in practice: you acknowledge, describe and evidence your use in a supplement that comes with the Project Cover Sheet. The guide calls it the AI Referencing Supplement; the policy calls it the AI Acknowledgement Supplement. Use the version your programme gives you. On evidence, the guide says: "An important step in this process is ensuring that, for tools that maintain a ‘history’, this is kept intact and not cleared."
You do not have to show every prompt and response. The guide asks you to put the most relevant ones in your appendices and to "be ready to display the remaining material during a meeting with staff if needed". Where a tool keeps no exportable history, such as suggestions that appear inside Microsoft Word, the policy asks you to name the tool and describe what it contributed instead.
NCI does not rule out detection software. The draft policy says: "Staff may use Turnitin GenAI detection, writing comparison, and heuristic evaluation to identify inconsistencies." Heuristic evaluation means looking for a mismatch between the ability a student has shown and one particular submission, such as a sudden shift in vocabulary or technical sophistication.
A separate document, NCI's Responsible Use of AI Procedure (version 1.0, approved by the Senior Leadership Team on 11 August 2026), limits what a detector can prove: "Do not use AI-detection tools as determinative evidence of misconduct." A detector result can start a conversation; it is not meant to end one. The draft policy also encourages programme teams to build in-person defences, visible drafts or oral components into assessments, and names a capstone project with an applied part as one form of authentic assessment.
Esmond evaluates; it does not write. You upload your own draft and get comments in the margin plus a report that shows where your argument, method or use of sources is weaker, and why. It does not write or rewrite your text: it points to the weak spot and offers guidance on how to revise it. Where a comment includes an example, it illustrates a principle; the sentence you submit is one you write yourself.
NCI has no connection with Esmond and has not endorsed it. Esmond uses language models, so using it counts as AI use. Rules on AI vary by university, programme, module and assignment. Check your module or programme handbook before you upload, and if it is unclear, ask your supervisor or module coordinator and declare the use if your institution asks you to.
This page summarises published institutional guidance and links to the original sources. It is not legal advice and not a ruling on your assignment: what your programme, module or supervisor sets always comes first.
A review costs from €3.99, with a free preview first. The price depends on the length of your document and you see it before you pay. No subscription, no account.
Under the draft policy, yes. The supplement goes with any submission, and where AI is prohibited it confirms that no GenAI assistance was used.
On 22 October 2026 the published version was still labelled V1.0 (Draft), with no approval date filled in. Check the current version on the NCI Support Hub or ask your programme.
No. NCI has no link with Esmond and has not endorsed it. Esmond is an AI tool and is not on any NCI list of approved tools, so ask your lecturer before you upload a draft, and whether it is allowed for that assessment. If it is, the policy's advice when you are unsure whether a use counts is to disclose it on the supplement.
Official documents, checked 22 October 2026. Quotations are word for word; the rest is our summary. Read the full text at the source.
Get your text reviewed before you submit
You get a free preview first. You only pay if you want the full review.