AI in a Motivation Letter: European University Rules

AI in a Motivation Letter: European University Rules

There is no European rule. TUM does not permit AI tools to create application documents. The MARIHE Erasmus Mundus letter allows AI only if you declare it, and an Aalto programme form asks you to declare any AI use. The TU Delft, ETH Zurich and UvA admissions pages we checked say nothing about AI.

The document goes by several names: motivation letter, letter of motivation (LoM), Motivationsschreiben in Germany, and "statement of purpose" on TUM's own pages. The searched question about AI is whether it is allowed. In Europe the forms ask a second question as well: did you say so? Our view: at TUM the use itself is the breach; at MARIHE the breach is failing to declare it. A spell-check you never mention can be harmless at one programme and a formal rejection at the other. When the letter is drafted, a one-page European motivation letter review reads it against the programme's own questions.

Every university page and form quoted below was checked on 31 October 2026. Forms change every intake, so open the current form for your programme before you write. For the rules outside Europe, see UK master's personal statement AI rules and Canadian graduate application AI policies.

The rules, programme by programme

Two rows are single programmes, not whole universities: the Aalto form belongs to one master's programme, and MARIHE is one Erasmus Mundus consortium. Other programmes at the same universities may ask differently.

Two kinds of rule: the use is the breach, or the silence is

TUM bans the use. Its style guide adds: "Please refrain from using AI when creating your documents. Self-created application documents are thoroughly checked for the use of AI." There is no declaration box, so there is nothing you can write that makes a use acceptable. TUM's AI and plagiarism rule quotes the full section.

MARIHE allows the use and punishes the silence. The template says: "The Consortium has decided to allow the use of AI, but only insofar as this requires a critical awareness of how to use it in line with the universities’ educational missions." You tick one of two boxes, "I declare that I have not used any AI tools to write this letter." or "I declare that I have used AI tools to write this letter, as described below.", name the tools, describe the purpose and part, and sign "by hand (as in passport)". The form closes with: "I am aware that failing to declare the use of AI fully or partly may lead to a rejection of my application due to formal reasons."

Aalto's form sits between them. It asks for a declaration and names "proofreading, translation, spelling, grammar" as uses. It does not say which uses are allowed, and it does not say what happens to an answer it does not like.

Our recommendation: if any programme on your list bans AI, write the core letter without it. If a form has a declaration field, treat every tool that touched the text as declarable, including a grammar checker, because Aalto lists "spelling" and "grammar" by name and MARIHE penalises a declaration that is incomplete "fully or partly". The basis is the wording above: a declaration costs one line, and an omission is the thing the MARIHE form says it rejects.

The countercase: if every programme on your list is a declare-and-allow programme, writing with no tool at all costs you help the rules permit. Then use what you need and declare it the same way on every form.

Germany: TUM's rule is not a German rule

TUM's ban is published by TUM and covers TUM applications. We did not find a Germany-wide rule, and we did not check every German university. Your letter for another German university is judged against that university's page and the declaration in its portal. If you apply through uni-assist, see does uni-assist read your motivation letter? for who reads what.

TUM also defines plagiarism in a way that matters for letters built from samples: "Plagiarism occurs when you – intentionally or unintentionally – pass off other authors’ work as your own."

Constructed example: one applicant, three European forms

Constructed example, written by us, not a real applicant's declarations. Context (invented): Ananya Rao applies to TUM, to Aalto's Electronics and Nanotechnology programme and to MARIHE in the same month. She wrote every sentence herself. On her first draft she ran the AI spelling and grammar checker built into her word processor.

TUM. There is no box to fill. Our recommendation: for the TUM version, switch the AI suggestions off and correct spelling herself, because the rule says AI tools may not be used "to create documents" and lists no exception for spelling.

Aalto (200-character field). Her answer, 183 characters by our count:

No AI tools were used to write, translate or plan the text. I used the AI spelling and grammar checker in my word processor on my final answers and accepted spelling corrections only.

MARIHE. She ticks the second box and fills the two fields:

Name(s) of the AI tools used: the spelling and grammar checker built into my word processor.

Purpose of use and the part in which it was used: spelling check of the final draft, all paragraphs. I accepted spelling corrections only. No sentence was generated or rewritten by a tool.

What the three have in common: the same facts, stated once, with no tool named that she did not use. What differs is the rule. At TUM the clean answer is not to use the tool. At Aalto and MARIHE it is to say exactly what she used. For other declaration formats, see how to write an AI use statement for a graduate application.

Netherlands and Switzerland: silence is not permission

TU Delft's required-documents page tells you what the 1,000–1,500-word letter must cover, down to "Describe your hypothetical thesis project", and says nothing about AI. ETH's master's pages name the letter of motivation and are also silent. So is UvA's central master's page.

If a school publishes no AI rule, the certification inside the application is what you sign, so read it there. Individual programmes can publish their own rules, so check the programme page as well. For what each letter must contain, see the TU Delft motivation letter guide and the ETH and EPFL one-page letter guide.

Can someone else write my motivation letter?

TUM calls the letter a "self-created" document and checks every one for plagiarism. Under its definition, a letter someone else wrote and you submit as yours is "other authors’ work". MARIHE's declaration covers AI tools only; the template says nothing about human help, so that is unknown. Read each programme's own wording.

If an agent or consultant drafted your letter, what readers notice in a consultant-written SOP covers the reader's side.

Check your list before you write

1. List every programme you will apply to and open its current form, not last year's.
2. Copy the exact AI sentence from each one, or write "none found" with the date you checked.
3. Mark each row: banned (TUM), declare (Aalto, MARIHE) or silent (TU Delft, ETH, UvA central pages).
4. If any row is banned, write the core letter with no AI tool. Pass: no sentence or correction came from a tool.
5. For each declaration field, write what you used from your own notes, within the character limit. Pass: every tool that touched the text is named, or you ticked "not used" truthfully.
6. For silent rows, read the declaration in the portal before you submit.

Questions about AI in European motivation letters

Does the German visa motivation letter follow the same rule?

No. The visa letter goes to the German mission, not to the university, and its rules are separate. See AI-generated visa letters and rejection in Germany.

Is a translation tool AI?

At Aalto, the form lists "translation" among the AI uses you declare. TUM's rule covers AI tools used "to create documents" and lists no exceptions. If you draft in your first language and translate with an AI tool, that is a declared use at Aalto and MARIHE and, on TUM's wording, not permitted there.

Can I use one letter for several European universities?

Not as it stands. TUM says "A generic letter of motivation is not sufficient", and each form above asks different questions, from MARIHE's specialisation preference to Delft's thesis topics. Reuse your facts, not your paragraphs.

Can universities detect AI in a motivation letter?

TUM says its documents are "thoroughly checked for the use of AI" and does not say how. None of the other pages above describes a check.

Get a free review of your motivation letter

Get a free Quick Review of your motivation letter against GradPilot's one-page European motivation letter rubric. It reads whether the letter names the programme and why you chose it, answers what that programme asked for, ties your preparation to its demands, and fits the space allowed. For a letter to a German university, use the German Motivationsschreiben rubric.

More guides for European letters:

• Erasmus Mundus motivation letter rules and sample: word limits by consortium.
• Aalto's two study options and two letters: when one application needs two letters.
• All graduate school essay guides.

Sources

Retrieved 31 October 2026, except where noted.

• Technical University of Munich, TUM style guide for application documents (no year stated): one-page limit, generic-letter rule, plagiarism definition, AI rule and consequence.
• Aalto University, Electronics and Nanotechnology motivation questionnaire (2027 intake): character limits and the AI declaration question.
• MARIHE Erasmus Mundus, Letter of Motivation template (intake 2027): two-page limit, AI declaration, formal-rejection clause.
• TU Delft, Required documents, MSc international diploma (no year stated): motivation letter length and contents; no AI statement.
• ETH Zurich, Application Master and Profile requirements (no year stated): assessed elements; no AI statement.
• University of Amsterdam, Applying for a Master's programme (no year stated): no AI statement on the central page.