Skip to content
Second Read
Get your free review

Check your school list · 2026-27

Pick your schools. See what each one says about AI in application essays, in its own words.

Verbatim quotes, official links, the date each was read. Free. No login. 150 schools.

The short version, from the full index: 7 of 150 effectively prohibit AI, 36 publish guidance that allows some uses and not others, 5 publish commentary without restrictions, and 102 publish nothing at all.

Showing an example list. Add a school to start yours.

Example list — 1 effectively prohibits · 1 published guidance · 1 commentary only · 1 no policy

Your strictest school is Brown University. Its policy governs anything you reuse across essays: a paragraph you worked on with a tool for one school is still AI-assisted when you paste it into another.

  1. Brown University

    Effectively prohibits AI help, feedback included (our reading)
    Brown affirms this definition and reiterates our own independent policy that the use of artificial intelligence by an applicant is not permitted under any circumstances in conjunction with application content. While an applicant may use artificial intelligence to assist with spelling and grammar review, in the same way as any other platform that supports basic proofreading, the content of all essays, short-answer questions and any other material submitted by an applicant must be the work of that individual.

    admission.brown.edu ↗Policy read Sep 8, 2026what changed

    What this means for you

    Brown does not permit AI in connection with your application content — the only exception is basic spelling and grammar proofreading. Second Read gives feedback on your draft, which goes beyond that, so we don't offer reviews for Brown essays. We turned school-specific reviews off here, paid plan or not.

  2. Yale University

    Publishes guidance: some AI uses allowed, others not
    Submitting personal statements or other written application responses composed by text-generating software may result in admission revocation or expulsion. ... Using an AI platform to review one's grammar or spelling, or to seek general advice or topic suggestions at the start of the writing process does not constitute application fraud.

    admissions.yale.edu ↗Policy read Sep 8, 2026what changed

    What this means for you

    The school has published rules: some AI uses allowed, others not. The specifics are in the quote above, and they differ school to school, so read it as written. Where it is silent on a kind of help, the certification you sign when you submit is the rule that applies. What the certification means.

  3. University of Colorado Boulder

    Publishes commentary on AI without restricting it
    AI tools have become a common part of how students brainstorm, organize and draft written work. [...] Before using any AI tool in your essay process, check the application and academic integrity policies of each university you are applying to, as guidelines vary by institution. [...] If you do use AI in a way that is permitted, keep in mind that it works best for early-stage tasks like getting ideas flowing or catching small grammar issues in a draft you have already written. [...] Regardless of how you approach the drafting process, always have a real person review your final essay, someone who knows you and can tell you honestly whether it sounds like you.

    colorado.edu ↗Policy read Sep 8, 2026what changed

    What this means for you

    The school has published thoughts about AI without restricting how you use it. The quote is the whole of it, and it is not permission for anything in particular. The certification you sign when you submit still applies. What the certification means.

  4. Amherst College

    No published AI policy found

    No quote: the school publishes nothing about AI on its admissions pages.

    amherst.edu ↗Policy read Sep 8, 2026what changed

    Nothing published, nothing to file. What matters is the certification you sign.

    We found nothing about AI on this school's official admissions pages when we checked. That is not permission, and it does not rule out a question inside the application itself: read your own application's questions. The certification says the work is your own. What the certification means.

This is not advice. Verify with the school. Policies change mid-season; that is why every card shows the date its policy was read. How we classify: methodology. Every change we make: /changes.

Recently changed in the prompt database

  • Sep 8 AI Policy Index: every policy page re-read — Our re-read of all 150 schools’ AI-policy pages: 147 rows now carry September 8 as their read date; Babson, Purdue, and the University of Chicago could not be fetched that day and keep August 27. Three schools we had not been able to read are now classified (Fordham, UMass Amherst, Virginia Tech), one school we had recorded as silent now carries its published words (UNC), and three quotes were completed or extended (Bowdoin, Stony Brook, WashU). The counts moved from 7 · 35 · 2 · 103 · 3 to 7 · 36 · 5 · 102 · 0 (effectively prohibit · published guidance · commentary · no published policy · not yet verified).
  • Sep 8 Fordham University — Read for the first time: Fordham’s “AI Policy for Application Writing” page sends automated fetches to a login gateway, so we read it in a browser. It allows AI “in its proper place, such as brainstorming ideas or polishing a draft” and warns that manufactured content breaks the application’s narrative. Classified as published guidance; school-specific reviews, paused since August 27 because we could not read the policy, are open.
  • Sep 8 University of Massachusetts Amherst — Read for the first time (the pages blocked us on August 27): nine official admissions pages carry no rule about applicants’ use of AI; an FAQ on the Admission Decision page says the office “do[es] not use AI to evaluate or make decisions about undergraduate student applications.” Classified as commentary, with a note that it describes the office’s own use of AI; school-specific reviews are open.