InputDojo vs Professor Goose

InputDojo and Professor Goose are both education & learning tracked by AIDiveForge. Below is a side-by-side comparison of pricing, capabilities, platforms, and ownership — sourced from each tool's live website and verified before publishing.

InputDojo

The core loop is structured around proficiency levels: you work through vocabulary in context, get speech feedback on conversation practice, and the system reschedules reviews based on what you're actually forgetting. That beats flashcard apps that treat every word the same. The constraint shows up when you need niche language pairs or want to export your progress data — the vendor does not describe an open API, so your learning history stays inside the platform. Teams using this to supplement formal instruction get the most mileage; learners who want to pipe data into a custom dashboard hit a wall fast.

Professor Goose

The tool takes uploaded content — PDFs, typed notes, syllabus topics — and generates questions designed to surface what you cannot yet explain, not just what you have not read. It fits concept-heavy subjects where understanding chains matter: explain supply curves wrong and the follow-up question will catch it. The free tier runs on a shared usage allowance, so heavy daily sessions can hit a ceiling before a study block is done. There is no API, no self-hosting, and no way to pipe it into a broader study platform — what you see in the browser is what you get.

Attribute	InputDojo	Professor Goose
Pricing	Paid	Paid
Price	$7.99–$14.99/month	£7.99/month (Premium)
Free trial	14 days	No
Open source	No	No
Has API	No	No
Self-hosted option	No	No
Platforms	Web, iOS, Android	Web (browser-based)
Pros	Exam-aligned study plans for JLPT and HSK mean practice time maps directly to what standardized tests score, so you're not drilling vocabulary that won't appear on the test you're sitting. Vocabulary presented in native-media context rather than textbook sentences, which means words land with the register and colocation patterns you'll actually encounter in listening or reading sections. Instant speech feedback on conversation practice closes the gap that silent review apps leave — you hear whether your pronunciation is off before bad habits calcify. Spaced repetition tuned to individual mastery levels, so the system reschedules reviews based on where you actually struggle rather than applying a one-size decay curve to every learner. Mobile and web access from a single account, so review sessions fit around a schedule that doesn't include dedicated study blocks.	Socratic follow-up questions respond to what you wrote, not a generic rubric — so a half-correct answer about price elasticity gets probed on the part you missed, not marked wrong and moved on. PDF upload and syllabus mapping let you anchor sessions to your actual course material, which means the questions stay relevant to what will be examined rather than drifting into adjacent topics. Active recall by default — every session requires you to produce an explanation, not recognise one — so you find out before the exam which concepts you only think you understand. Progress tracking across sessions surfaces which topics you keep stumbling on, so you can redirect study time instead of repeating sessions that felt comfortable.
Cons	No API and no data export path: every progress metric, vocab list, and mastery score lives inside the platform. Learners or institutions that need to feed data into an LMS or run their own retention analysis have no route out — they're maintaining a parallel tracking system manually. AI-powered features — personalized plans, speech feedback — are paid-only features. The free tier does not deliver the core differentiator, which means evaluating whether the tool actually fits your learning style requires committing to a paid account. Learners whose goal is conversational fluency in an unsupported language pair, or who need a tutor-like correction model beyond speech feedback, will hit the ceiling of what a structured app can offer and move to a platform with live tutors or a larger language coverage list.	The free tier runs on a shared usage allowance: a two-hour revision block across multiple topics can exhaust the daily quota mid-session, forcing you to stop or pay — this is a hard wall, not a soft slowdown. No API and no integrations mean the tool cannot connect to Notion, Anki, an LMS, or anything else in your study stack; if your workflow involves syncing review data or building custom pipelines, you are maintaining a completely separate manual step. Teams or educators building structured curricula for multiple students have no admin layer, cohort tracking, or content management — at that point the tool's individual-student design becomes a ceiling and most switch to a platform with instructor controls.

Bottom line

InputDojo and Professor Goose are closely matched on pricing model, openness, and API availability — pick by feature set and platform support in the table above.

Comparison data is sourced and verified by the AIDiveForge data pipeline. AIDiveForge is editorially independent.