CorrectMyPaper
Freemium
Academic researchers preparing journal submissions
You submit, the instructor runs Turnitin, and you have no idea how your draft will score until it's too late. Turnitin Report exists to close that gap — a pre-submission checker that estimates how AI-generated your writing looks before anyone else sees it.
Paste your essay and the tool returns an overall AI-likeness score plus paragraph-level notes flagging sections that read as generic, repetitive, or mechanically structured. No account required. The report-style output goes further than a raw percentage — it names the specific signal types driving the score, so you know whether the problem is sentence rhythm, transition overuse, or missing specific evidence. The ceiling hits fast: there is no API, no batch processing, and no way to integrate this into an LMS or writing workflow. For a student running a single draft before submission, that is fine. For an instructor processing thirty papers, it is a bottleneck.
Bottom line: The right call for a student who wants a rough pre-submission read on a single essay — the wrong call for any workflow that needs batch analysis, integration, or anything resembling a ground-truth accuracy guarantee.
1 Credit / Month
5 Credits / Month
12 Credits / Month
View full pricing on turnitin.report →
Pricing may have changed since last verified. Check the official site for current plans.
Find your fit
More options in Grammar & Style Checkers. Compare pricing, platforms, and features side by side.
Freemium
Academic researchers preparing journal submissions
Free · Open source
Writers editing AI-assisted text
Turnitin Report is a one-shot, paste-and-check AI detection tool aimed at students and academic writers who want to preview how their draft might read to an AI detector before submitting. The workflow is about as direct as it gets: paste text, click check, receive an estimated AI score expressed as a percentage, a risk-level label (low through very high), and short paragraph-level notes identifying where AI-like signals appear. No login, no file upload, no account creation.
The differentiating claim against simpler detectors is the report format rather than a single number. The vendor states the tool analyzes six specific signal types — predictable sentence flow, repeated paragraph structure, generic academic language, low specific detail, mechanical transitions, and overly clean tone — and surfaces notes at the paragraph level so you can prioritize which sections to rewrite first rather than guessing from a top-line score alone.
This fits one scenario well: a student or academic writer doing a final gut-check on a single draft. It breaks down quickly outside that scenario. There is no API, so no programmatic access. There is no self-hosted option. The tool processes one paste at a time with no batch capability, which means any institutional or multi-document use case requires manual repetition at scale. The vendor also frames the score explicitly as ‘a review signal, not a final judgment,’ which is honest — but it means you cannot treat the output as a definitive accuracy benchmark and should not cite it as evidence of anything.
Sign in to rate this tool or suggest an edit.