At South East Technological University (SETU), misuse of generative AI is academic misconduct, and where its use is permitted it must be acknowledged through citations and references. Guidance for your own work comes from your Faculty, Department, Programme or internal examiner, a term the policy says includes supervisors. Here is what SETU's Student Academic Integrity Policy (version 1.0, 17 February 2026) says, checked 17 October 2026.
Try the free previewThe policy lists the actions that contravene academic integrity: breaches of examination regulations, cheating, plagiarism, impersonation, contract cheating, data falsification and "misuse of generative artificial intelligence". Misuse is not defined in one line. It depends on what your lecturers and programme permit, which is why the guidance for your own assessment matters more than any general statement.
Where AI is allowed, the policy asks for transparency in both directions: lecturers should make sure students know where GenAI may or may not be used, and students should make clear where they used it. The acknowledgement rule is wider than chatbots: "Where permitted, documented use of GenAI, and any other tools for writing or producing any work which is submitted for assessment, should be appropriately acknowledged as required under SETU regulations for undergraduate and taught postgraduate programmes".
The policy also says that a substantive contribution of technology, generative AI included, is acknowledged through internal citations and references, in the same way as the contributions of other people.
Specific guidance on GenAI for learning and assessment comes through your Faculty, Department, Programme or internal examiner. A footnote explains that internal examiner includes supervisors and all staff involved in assessment. For a final year project or dissertation, your supervisor is therefore one of the people who can tell you what is permitted, and a sensible first person to ask.
The guiding principles in the policy add a few points worth knowing: the University offers training so that students are informed about AI-based activities, student data and privacy must be protected under GDPR when data is entered into a GenAI tool, and GenAI use should align with SETU's ethical values.
Unlike some Irish universities, SETU's policy allows that tools to detect AI-generated content may be used to help identify potential misconduct, while noting that these tools are still developing and their output must be interpreted carefully and ethically. Submitting work is itself taken as your confirmation that you have followed the policy.
The lecturer makes the academic judgement, and the policy adds: "Upon assessment submission, any student may be called upon to engage in an informal discussion and/or oral examination in order to assist the lecturer in forming that academic judgement." Being asked is not an accusation. The best preparation is knowing your own work: why you asked this question, chose this method and read these sources.
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 gives a direction for revising it. Where a comment includes an example, it illustrates a principle; the sentence you submit is one you write yourself.
SETU has no connection with Esmond and has not endorsed it. Be straight with yourself: Esmond works with language models, so using it is a form of AI use. Rules on AI differ per 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 what the institution publishes, with links to the source. 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 follows the length of your document and you see it before you pay. No subscription, no account.
The policy says such tools may be used to help identify potential misconduct, and that their output must be interpreted carefully and ethically because the tools are still developing.
The policy names your Faculty, Department, Programme or internal examiner as the source of specific guidance, and its footnote says internal examiner includes supervisors. Start with your supervisor and your module information.
No. Esmond is independent. SETU has no connection with Esmond and has not endorsed it.
Official document, checked 17 October 2026. Quotations are word for word; the rest is our summary. Read the full text at the source.