Digital learning
Grammarly for students: useful corrections, with limits
I have used Grammarly, and my recommendation for students is to start with the editing task and the assessment rules. Grammar suggestions can help you notice mistakes; they do not establish that your evidence, reasoning or references are sound. Try the permitted free features before paying for more rewriting help.
Key takeaways
- Our public-checker sample produced two grammar flags.
- One accepted suggestion changed “have” to “has”.
- The sample’s causal claim and invented citation received no visible flags in that run.
- Check institutional access, permitted features and the full billing amount before buying.
What was actually checked
I have used Grammarly previously. For this article, a fresh editorial check on 9 September 2026 entered one original, synthetic paragraph into the logged-out public grammar checker. We inspected the visible suggestions and accepted one correction. No private student work was submitted. This was not a test of the paid editor, browser extension, plagiarism checker or AI detector.
The small sample illustrates a workflow boundary. It cannot establish an overall accuracy rate, compare every competing tool or tell you how Grammarly handles a full dissertation. Prices and plan features below were checked separately against official documentation.
The exact sample and observed result
Test text: “Each of the students have submitted their report. The results proves that online lessons are always better. In our invented example, eight volunteers chose an online class and reported higher confidence afterwards. This proves that online lessons caused better learning. According to Smith (2025), the effect is universal.”
All people, results and the Smith citation in that paragraph are invented test material. The interface showed two suggestions, with visible underlines on “have” and “proves”. We accepted the subject-verb agreement suggestion replacing “have” with “has”; the visible count then fell to one. The remaining suggestion was not accepted during this check.
| Item | Observation | What the student still needs to do |
|---|---|---|
| “Each … have” | Flagged; “has” offered and applied. | Understand that “each” takes a singular verb here. |
| “The results proves” | “proves” visibly underlined. | Check agreement: the plural “results” takes “prove”. |
| Confidence treated as learning and causation | No visible flag on those claims in this run. | Inspect what was measured and whether the design supports causation. |
| Smith (2025) and “universal” | No visible flag on the invented citation or universal claim in this run. | Locate a real source and check the scope of its evidence. |
My judgement from the sample
The useful part is concrete: a grammar problem became visible and the first correction was appropriate. The limitation is equally concrete: the paragraph could become more grammatical without becoming a credible academic argument. I would use this kind of assistance as a final language check, with the evidence review already completed.
The student editing checklist shows a manual revision of the weak argument. Compare that revision with a simple verb correction: it changes the claim, explains its limits and removes an unverified reference.
Free or Pro for a student?
Grammarly’s plan page lists basic grammar and spelling help on Free, alongside AI features. Pro adds more rewriting and style assistance. Those extra features may be unnecessary, or unsuitable for a particular assessed task. A paid plan is not evidence that a suggestion is correct or that its use is permitted.
The support page listed US$30 per month, US$60 per three months or US$144 per year on 9 September 2026. The annual “US$12 per month” equivalent means US$144 billed for the year. Regional GBP, EUR and INR prices appear at checkout; these US figures are not a UK quote. Check your institution’s provision and the renewal amount first.
| Your situation | My starting recommendation |
|---|---|
| Occasional proofreading, rules permit it | Try the free help and a manual checklist. |
| Your university already provides access | Check the included features and university guidance before purchasing separately. |
| Repeated permitted editing needs beyond the free features | Test those exact needs before choosing a paid billing period. |
| Assessment prohibits the relevant AI or rewriting assistance | Do not use those features for that task, regardless of plan. |
Keep control of the writing
Abertay University’s guidance is one concrete example: it gives the assessment brief priority and advises disabling generative features for proofreading. Your own institution may set different boundaries. Product names such as Free or Pro do not settle what is permitted.
Save the original draft. Review each suggestion individually, especially changes to certainty, technical terms and the relationship between ideas. Do not submit confidential material to a third-party tool without the appropriate permission. For readability alone, the Fog calculator on this site provides a narrower check.
Who I would recommend it to
I would consider Grammarly for a student who can use it within the assessment rules, wants help noticing language errors and will review rather than automatically accept suggestions. I would not buy it simply to make an essay look finished: a writing-centre appointment, careful source checking and a revision log may address the real problem more directly.
Sources and further reading
- Grammarly public grammar checker: tested with synthetic text on 9 September 2026 (accessed 9 September 2026)
- Grammarly: Free and Pro plan features (accessed 9 September 2026)
- Grammarly Support: Pro prices and regional billing (accessed 9 September 2026)
- Abertay University: Grammarly guidance (accessed 9 September 2026)
Access dates are recorded beside each source. Please report a source or factual concern.