Guidance for APC candidates: Using artificial intelligence (AI) in your APC submission

Applicable to applications for Associate, Legal Associate and Chartered Planner submitted from the 9th of October 2026 onwards.

Introduction

The Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) recognises that Artificial Intelligence (AI) is becoming a common feature of professional practice and day-to-day life. Many candidates will already be using tools such as Microsoft Copilot, ChatGPT, Grammarly, Claude, Gemini, or similar applications in their day-to-day work.

However, the APC is designed to assess your individual professional competence, judgement, experience, ethics, and reflective practice.

For this reason, the RTPI has introduced a new policy governing the use of AI in membership applications and professional assessments. The policy permits limited use of AI for support purposes but prohibits AI from generating substantive APC content.

This guidance explains what you can and cannot do when preparing your APC submission and how to comply with the declaration requirements.

The RTPI’s AI use golden rule

Your APC submission must represent:

• Your own professional experience
• Your own planning knowledge
• Your own professional judgement
• Your own reflective practice
• Your own ethical reasoning

AI may assist with presentation and proofreading, but it must not produce the evidence on which your competence is assessed.

A useful question to ask yourself is:

"If an assessor asked me to explain how I wrote this section and where the ideas came from, could I confidently say that these are genuinely my own work, thoughts and reflections?"

 If the answer is no, you should not include the content.

Section 1: What counts as AI?

AI includes software or digital tools which can:

• Generate text
• Rewrite text
• Summarise information
• Analyse content
• Suggest wording
• Create reports or narratives

Examples include:

• Microsoft Copilot
• ChatGPT
• Grammarly
• Claude
• Gemini
• Notion AI
• Other AI-powered writing tools

This list is not exhaustive. The policy applies regardless of the AI system used.

Section 2: What AI use is allowed?

The RTPI permits limited and supportive use of AI where it does not undermine the authenticity of your submission.

1. Proofreading

You may use AI to:

• Check spelling
• Check grammar
• Identify typographical errors
• Improve readability
• Provide feedback on your draft submission

Acceptable example 1

Situation: You write your competency statement and ask:

AI Prompt: "Please identify spelling mistakes and grammatical errors."

Output of your prompt: The AI highlights errors, and you decide whether to accept the corrections.

 

2. Formatting assistance

You may use AI to help:

• Organise headings
• Format bullet points
• Improve document structure
• Check consistency of formatting

Acceptable example

AI prompt: "Please check that all headings use a consistent format."

3. Readability and clarity checks

You may use AI to identify:

• Overly long sentences
• Repetition
• Areas where explanations are unclear

Acceptable example

AI prompt: "Which sections are difficult to read?"

Output of your prompt: The decision on whether to amend the wording remains yours.

 

4. General feedback

The policy allows candidates to use AI to obtain feedback and identify areas for improvement.

Acceptable example

AI prompt:

"Have I clearly explained the planning context in this case study?"

The AI provides comments for consideration. However, AI must not subsequently write the replacement text for you.

 

Section 3: What AI use is not allowed?

The RTPI prohibits any use of AI to create, draft, or rewrite substantive APC content.

 

1. Writing your competency evidence

You must not ask AI to generate evidence demonstrating your competence.

Unacceptable example:

AI prompt: "Write a paragraph explaining how I meet Competency C2."

Not permitted

 

2. Creating reflective statements

Reflection is a core part of APC assessment.

Unacceptable example:

AI prompt: "Write a reflection on what I learned from managing a planning appeal."

Not permitted

 

3. Generating case studies

Your case studies must be based on your own work and analysis.

Unacceptable example:

AI prompt: "Generate a case study that demonstrates my planning experience."

Not permitted

 

4. Rewriting personal experience

Even if the experience is yours, AI must not substantially rewrite it for you.

Unacceptable example:

You provide a rough paragraph and ask:

AI prompt:  "Rewrite this so it sounds more professional and persuasive."

This risks crossing into prohibited substantive drafting.

 

5. Creating competency examples

The policy specifically prohibits AI from generating examples intended to demonstrate APC competencies.

Unacceptable example:

AI prompt: "Generate another example showing how I meet Competency C5."

Not permitted

 

Top tip: Understanding "substantive content"

A useful way to distinguish between permissible and prohibited use is to consider ownership.

Non-substantive content

AI helps improve presentation.

Examples:

• Grammar
• Spelling
• Formatting
• Structure
• Readability

Permitted

Substantive content

AI contributes ideas, reflections, examples, analysis, conclusions, personal experiences or competency evidence.

Not permitted

If the AI is helping create evidence for assessment, it is almost certainly prohibited.

 

Section 4: A simple traffic light guide

Green – safe to use

• Spell checking
• Grammar checking
• Formatting advice
• Readability suggestions
• Identifying duplicated wording
• Word count support

Permitted

 

Amber – use caution

• General feedback on clarity.
• Suggestions for improving document structure.
• Highlighting missing information.

Ensure you remain the author of all content.

 

Red – do not use

• Writing competency evidence.
• Drafting reflections.
• Creating case studies.
• Generating examples.
• Producing APC answers.
• Rewriting sections to demonstrate competence.

Prohibited

 

Section 5: Declaring your use of AI

All candidates must complete an AI declaration. This form is available for download from the website, and you will need to upload it to the same upload field where you upload your PDP. You may need to combine the documents as a PDF.

 

If you used AI tools to support your application, you will need to state:

 

Step 1: State which AI tool you used

For example:

• Microsoft Copilot
• ChatGPT
• Grammarly

 

What you used it for

For example:

"I used Grammarly to identify grammar and spelling errors."

 

Step 2: Detail how you checked the output

For example:

"I reviewed all suggested changes manually and confirmed that all substantive content remained my own work."

 

Step 3: Confirmation

You must confirm that:

• The submission reflects your own experience.
• The submission reflects your own professional judgement.
• The submission reflects your own reflective practice.

 

What happens if suspected AI usage is detected in your APC submission?

The RTPI may use tools such as Turnitin as part of its review process, although decisions will not rely solely on automated AI detection systems.

 

Failure to comply with the policy may lead to:

• Further enquiries from the RTPI.
• Investigation of the submission.
• Refer to Conduct and Discipline panel for potential further discipline procedures.

 

Section 7: Final advice

The safest approach is to think of AI as a proofreader and formatting assistant, not a co-author.

If AI is helping you improve the presentation of work you have already written, you are likely operating within the policy.

If AI is helping you create the content that demonstrates your competence as a planner, you are almost certainly operating outside the policy.

Ultimately, APC assessors and the RTPI must be able to conclude that the submission represents your own professional knowledge, experience, judgement and reflective practice, which is the fundamental purpose of the APC process.