At TU Dublin, students may use generative AI only in ways their lecturer has approved in advance, set out on a scale such as the AI Assessment Scale, and any tool that changes your text beyond simple spelling and grammar checks has to be recorded. Here is what TU Dublin's guidelines say, checked 17 October 2026.
Try the free previewTU Dublin's Guidelines on the Responsible Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (April 2025, approved by AQAEC on 13 May 2025) set the principle for learners: "To support academic integrity, GenAI can only be used by students in ways that are approved in advance by their lecturer."
Lecturers are expected to tell students clearly which uses are allowed, using an appropriate scale such as the AI Assessment Scale, which is built into the University guidelines. For your final year project or dissertation, the answer therefore sits with what your lecturer or supervisor has set for that assessment. If you have not been told what is allowed, ask before you use a tool.
Where use is approved, it has to be recorded according to your assessment guidelines and the conventions of your discipline. That can mean describing how you used a system, citing it in the text, or both. The University's page Communicating with students about GenAI compares this to other method details, such as a systematic search strategy or a statistical analysis, and adds: "This includes the use of any system that amends text beyond simple spelling and grammar checks".
In plain terms, the guidelines draw the line at simple spelling and grammar checks. On our reading, a tool that rephrases sentences, restructures paragraphs or suggests content goes beyond simple spelling and grammar checks; ask your lecturer whether it is approved and how to record it.
The same page is blunt about who answers for AI output: "Students accept that they are wholly responsible for ensuring the veracity, accuracy and/or creative merit of the output generated by any artificial intelligence model." You are also responsible for judging the risk of falsification, fabrication and plagiarism that comes with it. A reference invented by a chatbot is your error, not the tool's.
Inappropriate use, as determined by the relevant Faculty, is described as a breach of academic integrity that may lead to disciplinary action. The guidelines also ask you to understand the capabilities and limits of any tool you propose to use, including changes to how it handles data privacy and copyright.
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.
TU Dublin 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 guidelines do not name tools. They draw the line at simple spelling and grammar checks: anything that amends text beyond that should be approved by your lecturer in advance and recorded.
No. Esmond is independent. TU Dublin has no connection with Esmond and has not endorsed it.
Official documents, checked 17 October 2026. Quotations are word for word; the rest is our summary. Read the full text at the source.