Turnitin is the platform your district or university already pays for. The Similarity Report is your institution's official AI record, integrated into Canvas, Blackboard, Brightspace, and Moodle, and it travels with any integrity case from grading through formal hearing. TextSight is the personal pre-grading classifier you run alongside it. Sentence-level highlights with a per-line rationale, ESL-aware calibration tuned for international students, a free tier on a personal email, and faculty .edu pricing at $13.99 a month. This page is the teacher-side framing: not which one to pick, but how to use both so a grey-zone Turnitin flag becomes a defensible student conversation instead of a one-classifier accusation.
A short feature table first, from the teacher perspective. The narrative sections below go deeper on each row, with the parts where Turnitin is genuinely the institutional standard called out clearly.
| Feature | TextSight | Turnitin AI Detection |
|---|---|---|
| Primary product | Individual AI detector with sentence-level evidence and AI rewriter | Institutional Similarity Report with AI percentage bolted on |
| Detection type | Per-sentence colour map with per-line rationale | Overall AI percentage, broad underlines vary by contract tier |
| Free tier | Yes, 3 scans/day at 5,000 chars, no card | None for individuals, institutional contract only |
| Pricing model | Direct-to-individual subscription, self-serve | District or university contract, negotiated per seat |
| Entry price | $9.99 monthly Starter | Not available for individual purchase |
| Pro annual effective | $14.99 monthly billed annually ($179.88/year) | Not available for individual purchase |
| .edu discount | $13.99 monthly on verified faculty .edu, .ac.uk, .ac.in, .edu.au | No individual faculty pricing |
| Sentence-level evidence | Yes, free tier, per-line rationale (rhythm, vocabulary, cadence) | Limited, varies by institutional configuration |
| ESL FPR | 6% on 100-passage internal benchmark | No public benchmark; challenged by Vanderbilt and Pittsburgh policy offices |
| Native FPR | 3% on 100-passage internal benchmark | No public benchmark; reported variable by institutional press |
| GPT-4 TPR | 92% on 100-passage internal benchmark | No public benchmark; institutional-only access blocks side-by-side |
| Claude TPR | 90% on 100-passage internal benchmark | No public benchmark; institutional-only access blocks side-by-side |
| Bundled AI rewriter | Yes, 50,000 words/mo on Pro | No, detector only |
| REST API | Yes, on Business $39.99 monthly ($29.99 yearly) | LTI and LMS integrations only, no public REST API for individuals |
| Best fit | Teachers verifying a Turnitin flag with per-line evidence before the student conversation | The institutional grading record your district already pays for |
Prices verified May 2026. Verify on each tool's pricing page before subscribing. Win markers reflect the teacher-side feature gap, not a third-party audit.
Four things Turnitin does for the institutional grading record that TextSight does not and will not try to. Acknowledging them is the whole point of writing this page as a pairing rather than a replacement.
When the grade goes back into the gradebook, the Turnitin AI score is the number on the institutional record. The integrity office opens the Similarity Report. The dean reads the same report if the case escalates. Whatever TextSight says is private to your account; whatever Turnitin says is the document the institution recognises. That hierarchy is built into how academic integrity processes work, and it should be.
If your school uses Turnitin, every essay your students submit through Canvas, Blackboard, Brightspace, or Moodle is automatically scored on the way through. You do not click anything. You do not configure anything per assignment. The integration runs across all your sections at once, which is exactly why a personal verification step on the side matters when a flag lands in the grey zone.
A single Turnitin report covers similarity to existing sources, similarity to other student submissions across your institution, and the AI-generated probability. If a student copy-pasted from a classmate's paper or a previous year's submission, Turnitin will catch it on the same scan. TextSight is an AI detection specialist; it does not have decades of student submissions to match against, and it does not try to replace the plagiarism corpus.
Turnitin scans the full submission regardless of length, including dissertations and theses that run 20,000 plus words, and it compares submissions across all sections of a course. TextSight's free tier caps at 5,000 characters per scan and Pro at 10,000, which means long documents need to be split into sections for pre-grading sanity checks. For graduate-level work and cross-section monitoring, Turnitin's single-pass capacity is the practical default.
If your school already pays for Turnitin, you cannot opt out of that part of the grading workflow and you should not want to. The rest of this page is about what to do on your side before a flagged paper becomes a formal conversation.
For teachers grading four to eight sections a term across mixed-ability classrooms, here is where TextSight beats Turnitin on the work that matters to you, the grader, before a flag turns into a formal hearing.
Turnitin licenses to institutions only. As a teacher you cannot add a personal Turnitin seat at any price, and asking your district to procure a second AI detector for one faculty member is not a realistic conversation. TextSight sells directly to individuals: free tier with no signup, Pro at $19.99 monthly or $14.99 on annual billing, verified faculty .edu emails at $13.99 monthly. No procurement, no purchase order, no IT review. That is a different market, not a feature delta, and it is the first reason teachers land on this page.
The single biggest gap in the teacher-side Turnitin experience is that the report does not give you the per-line evidence you need to walk into a student conversation. TextSight closes that gap. Every scan returns a sentence-by-sentence colour map with a short rationale per line: rhythm flat, vocabulary cluster, paragraph cadence, sentence-length variance. When the student says "I wrote that paragraph", you point at a specific red sentence and ask them to walk you through how they got there. The conversation moves from accusation to investigation, which is where it belongs.
Turnitin runs once on submission and the report lands inside the LMS after a queue delay. TextSight runs in about 30 seconds in a private browser tab. For a grey-zone flag where you want a second opinion before the period ends, the speed gap is the entire point. The Chrome extension takes that one step further: highlight any text in Canvas, Google Classroom, or a PDF viewer and scan it in place without copy-pasting to a new tab.
Turnitin's AI detector has been challenged in higher-ed press and by university policy offices for over-flagging formally-taught ESL writing. Vanderbilt and Pittsburgh paused the feature, and other institutions moved it to advisory status rather than enforcement. TextSight is tuned against writing samples from Indian universities, Filipino education programmes, and Chinese postgraduate writing. In our internal testing the false-positive rate on identical-quality ESL essays is roughly 40 percent lower. For international or mixed classrooms, that calibration gap is what stops you from carrying wrongful flags into a Title VI conversation.
TextSight's free tier is three scans a day at 5,000 characters per scan with no email, no signup, and no card. Pro is $19.99 monthly or $14.99 on annual billing with unlimited scans, and verified faculty .edu emails get Pro at $13.99 monthly. Many teachers subscribe to Pro only during midterm and finals grading and drop back to free between them. Turnitin has nothing at this price point because Turnitin is not for individual faculty purchase.
Turnitin is a closed institutional product. Faculty cannot buy individual seats, the AI detector is gated behind LTI integrations to LMS platforms, and the API is not available for independent benchmarking. So we cannot put Turnitin through the same 100-passage TPR/FPR test we ran against every other detector on the market. Here is what we ran instead, and how the numbers in the table above are sourced.
The TextSight numbers in the comparison table (92% GPT-4 TPR, 90% Claude TPR, 3% native FPR, 6% ESL FPR) come from a 100-passage internal benchmark we run every quarter. The set spans GPT-4o and Claude 3.5 Sonnet outputs across essay, technical, and creative domains, native English student writing from US and UK course archives, and ESL writing samples from Indian university repositories, Filipino education programmes, and Chinese postgraduate corpora. We do not publish a Turnitin number on this benchmark because we cannot run Turnitin without institutional access, and any single-account number we did publish would not be reproducible by other teachers.
If you teach four to eight sections during midterm or finals, the Turnitin score and the TextSight score arrive in different places at different times. Turnitin runs on submission inside Canvas, Blackboard, Brightspace, or Moodle, and the AI percentage lands in the gradebook column with the Similarity Report. TextSight runs on your side in about thirty seconds when you paste a flagged paper into a private browser tab. The two scores are not measuring the same thing on the same scale, which is why we frame this page as a pairing rather than a comparison. For grey-zone Turnitin flags (roughly 20 to 60 percent AI), running the same essay through TextSight gives you a second classifier built on different training data, a sentence-level colour map, and a per-line rationale you can show the student.
The biggest reason teachers land on this page is the ESL false-positive problem. Turnitin's AI detector has been challenged by Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching, the University of Pittsburgh, and other policy offices for over-flagging formally-taught ESL prose. Some institutions moved the feature to advisory rather than enforcement. TextSight's ESL FPR sits at 6% on our 100-passage benchmark, against published competitor ranges of 14 to 22 percent for general-purpose classifiers. For international or mixed classrooms where Turnitin returns a grey-zone flag on writing you suspect is the student's careful structured English, TextSight's calibration gap is the second opinion that prevents a wrongful Title VI conversation. The per-line evidence then lets you ask the student about specific sentences instead of waving a percentage at them.
Per-line evidence is the part Turnitin's teacher view does not give you, and it is what changes the tone of an integrity conversation. When you can point at a specific red sentence and ask the student to walk you through how they wrote it, the conversation moves from accusation to investigation. Honest students reconstruct the writing process; dishonest students stall. On FERPA, treat TextSight like any third-party tool: paste only the text you are comfortable being processed externally, strip identifying information, and remember that Pro scan history is private to your personal account and not part of any district reporting console. Many teachers paste excerpts rather than full essays, and the classifier does not need the student's name to return a score.
The honest workflow is not Turnitin versus TextSight. It is Turnitin as the institutional record, with TextSight as the personal verification step before a flag turns into an accusation. Two tools serving two stages of the same grading flow.
A student you have been watching all term submits an essay and Turnitin returns 58 percent AI. Grey-zone score, the kind that demands attention but does not justify an accusation on its own. The student is a quiet B-plus writer who has been improving. You do not want to ignore a real signal, and you do not want to wrongly accuse them.
Open a private browser tab and paste the same essay text into app.textsight.ai. Free tier handles 5,000 characters in one paste; faculty .edu Pro handles 10,000. The scan returns in about thirty seconds with an overall Authenticity Score and a sentence-by-sentence colour map.
If TextSight also flags above 50 percent, both classifiers agree and a follow-up conversation is justified. If TextSight returns below 25, the Turnitin flag is likely a false positive driven by the student's prose style, and the calibration gap is doing its job. The middle case, roughly 30 to 50 percent on TextSight, calls for reading the essay yourself before deciding.
Whichever way the scores land, the colour map points you at the specific sentences the classifier reacted to. Often the red sentences cluster in a single paragraph (a copy-paste from a chatbot), or they spread thin across the essay (a stylistic pattern, not an integrity issue). Bring the sentence-level evidence into the conversation. Ask the student to walk you through the flagged paragraph. Honest students reconstruct the writing process; dishonest students cannot.
If both classifiers agree and the red sentences cluster suspiciously, schedule the formal conversation. Bring the Turnitin report as the institutional record and use the TextSight highlights as your notes for where to ask questions. If the classifiers disagree, return the paper with the normal grade and note that the Turnitin flag was reviewed and not pursued. Either way, you made a defensible call backed by two classifiers and per-line evidence, which is exactly the professional judgement step an administrator wants to see if the case ever escalates.
Three things. First, you stop carrying grey-zone Turnitin flags into student conversations without a second opinion, which is where careers get hurt on both sides. Second, when you do escalate, you arrive with the institutional record, a confirming second-classifier score, and sentence-level evidence; three data points are much harder to dismiss than one. Third, the ESL calibration gap means international and multilingual students are less likely to be wrongly flagged on prose they wrote themselves.
TextSight Pro is $19.99 monthly or $14.99 monthly on annual billing, with verified faculty .edu emails at $13.99 monthly. Turnitin is institutional contract only; per-seat costs are negotiated at the district or university level and not available for individual faculty purchase.
Billed $89.88/year, save $30
Billed $179.88/year, save $60
Billed $359.88/year, save $120
Yearly billing saves 25%. Verified faculty .edu, .ac.uk, .ac.in, and .edu.au emails get Pro at $13.99/mo automatically. View full pricing →
Four common teacher situations and the realistic Turnitin plus TextSight setup for each. Pick whichever matches your next grading deadline.
Free tier is enough. Three scans a day at 5,000 characters covers verification on the one or two Turnitin flags a typical week produces. Your district's Turnitin runs automatically across the LMS. No subscription required.
Setup: TextSight Free + your district's Turnitin.
Two weeks of dense grading, multiple grey-zone Turnitin flags per day. Faculty .edu Pro at $13.99/mo pays back on day one: unlimited scans, 10,000 character pastes for longer essays, 90-day history for documentation if any flag becomes a formal hearing. Cancel back to free after finals.
Setup: TextSight Pro .edu + your university's Turnitin.
Long documents, multiple drafts across the term, examiner role now expected to verify AI use chapter by chapter. Faculty .edu Pro for 10,000 character pastes, file upload for chapters, 90-day history matters when a candidate asks about a draft you reviewed three weeks ago. Final submission still goes through your university's Turnitin workflow in one piece.
Setup: TextSight Pro .edu + your university's Turnitin.
High proportion of formally-taught ESL prose where Turnitin false positives cluster. Use TextSight specifically for the ESL calibration: pre-grade flagged papers, expect scattered yellows on careful structured prose, focus follow-up conversations on clusters of red. PDF export and 90-day Pro history protect you if a wrongful flag ever needs to be reversed.
Setup: TextSight Pro (ESL calibration) + your school's Turnitin.
The teacher landing page with classroom workflow, ESL calibration, and the faculty .edu Pro plan.
For teachers →The student-side framing of the same pairing, with pre-submission draft check workflow.
Read the student version →The general head-to-head, including the institutional and procurement angle.
Read the compare →Our classifier benchmarks, false-positive rates, and the ESL calibration methodology.
See the methodology →Free to try. No card. Verified faculty .edu emails get Pro at $13.99 a month.