No. Pedagrade runs its own private AI on hardware we own and operate. There's no OpenAI or Anthropic account to connect, no API key to paste, and no per-use AI fees. You just paste your course and run the audit.

Yes. Your content is analyzed on our own hardware to produce your audit. It is never sent to OpenAI, Anthropic, or any other AI company, and it is never used to train anything. Free audits aren't kept after your result. If you sign in, your audits are saved to your own account so you can reopen them. That's the whole reason it runs on our own AI rather than a third-party API.

Paste a storyboard, script, or transcript directly, or upload a file: Word (.docx), PowerPoint (.pptx), PDF, plain text, Markdown, JSON, or XML. For slide decks, the on-slide text and the speaker notes are both pulled in; for Word, the body text, tables, and text boxes. Building in Articulate Storyline or Rise? Export the translation file (Storyline: File, then Translation, then Export, as Word or XLIFF) and upload that. Old .doc files need to be saved as .docx first.

Draft is a quick triage pass for a fast read on where a course stands. Rigorous is a deeper analysis for the courses that matter. Both are anchored to the same learning-science rubric. Rigorous just looks harder and explains more.

Alongside the alignment map, seven open, established lenses, no proprietary black box. Every recommendation names the principle it draws on. Here's what each one checks:

• Bloom's Taxonomy (revised): are your learning objectives measurable and observable (real action verbs), pitched at the right cognitive level, mapped against Anderson & Krathwohl's 2001 hierarchy?
• Mayer's Multimedia Principles: cognitive load: is content chunked, are visuals paired with the words that explain them, is redundant or distracting material trimmed?
• Gagné's Nine Events: instructional sequence: does the course gain attention, state objectives, activate prior knowledge, present content, then give practice and feedback?
• Merrill's First Principles: problem-centered design: real tasks, demonstration, application, and integration, not just information.
• Assessment Alignment: does every quiz or test question actually measure a stated objective (constructive alignment)?
• WCAG 2.1 AA (accessibility): a deeper accessibility review of your content: alt text and descriptions for images and complex visuals, captions/transcripts, meaning not carried by color alone, descriptive links, logical heading structure and reading order, plain language, sensory-independent instructions, timing/seizure safety, and clear labels and error messages.
• Usability & learner experience: can a learner orient and act without friction? Clear starting point and navigation, each activity's purpose and connection, instructions before the task, consistency, progress/wayfinding, obvious help, and error prevention and recovery.

A note on WCAG: Pedagrade reviews accessibility at the design and content level, where most issues start, so you catch them early and cheaply. It reads the material you provide; it is not a full technical conformance scan of the finished course and does not replace automated tools (like axe or WAVE) or manual testing of the built output. Think of it as the design-stage safety net that keeps accessibility defects from reaching QA.

One row per learning objective, showing where it's taught, practiced, and assessed in your course. Pedagrade flags the gaps: an objective nobody practices, a quiz question that tests recall when the objective asks learners to apply, an objective nothing measures, and quiz items that serve no objective at all. Click any cell to see the evidence and what to strengthen. Practice and assessment include knowledge checks, scenarios, discussions, and projects, not just quizzes. The free audit shows the totals and the first objective; Pro shows the full map and exports it.

You can tell it. Pick the course type (fully online, hybrid, in-person with online parts, or self-paced) and the class size, and Pedagrade adjusts its recommendations the way an experienced reviewer would. For example, a large class doesn't need varied assignments, and a self-paced course needs practice built in because no instructor fills the gap. It still flags objective, alignment, and accessibility issues in any context.

Yes. Every finding includes a written rewrite, and with one click Pedagrade applies the fixes you approve back into your course and returns a revised draft, with a change log of exactly what changed. You review every edit, and export the result to Word or Markdown. Applying fixes is a Pro feature.

Both. Beyond the fixes for the course in front of you, every audit ends with a short practice plan: two to four prioritized habits to build, written designer-to-designer, so you apply the lesson to your next course instead of repeating the mistake. It teaches while it audits, which is especially useful for helping a whole team internalize good practice.

Usually about a minute. You paste, choose Draft or Rigorous, and the report comes back with the alignment map and your recommendations grouped as top recommendations, also recommended, and polish. You decide what to change.

Today Pedagrade is billed per person. If you're on an L&D team and want a shared or organization plan, email me and we'll sort something out. There's also a short page built for teams you can show your manager to make the case. I'd genuinely like to hear how your team would use it.

Your first audit is free, no account needed. After that, Pro is $29/month (or $290/year, 2 months free) for unlimited audits, the full alignment map, saved history, one-click revised drafts, and export to PDF, Word, Markdown, and CSV. No API keys, no per-use AI fees, cancel anytime. See pricing →