PDPA compliant and confidentialReply within 15 minutes, 7 days a weekGuiding Singapore students since 2010
Marker-style assignment reviews, fixes and writing since 2010
Your assignment is written, and now the doubt starts. Did you answer the question? Will the marker see analysis, or only description? Your lecturer may not pre-mark a draft, and friends just say it looks fine.
Our assignment review tells you what a marker is likely to say while there is still time to act: a comment on every rubric criterion, the weak spots and missing parts marked on your draft, and a fix list in order of the marks at stake. Short on time? Your reviewer can make the fixes too.
Where your draft stands
Most students who come here have a finished draft and one question: is it good enough? A review answers that. If the answer is no and time is short, your reviewer can fix it, polish it or start again. Our Check and fix route is a review plus the fixes made for you.
A subject expert reads your draft the way a marker would and tells you, criterion by criterion, what is working and what will cost marks.
You get the same review report, and the reviewer then rewrites the weak sections so they meet the criteria, in tracked changes.
If the content already answers the brief but the sentences let it down, editing is the better fit than a full review.
Sometimes a review shows the draft missed the task. If there is no time to rescue it, a subject writer produces a new assignment to your brief and rubric.
Go through the review comments live with your reviewer, so you understand each one and know what the marker is looking for.
Before you submit
Students who have done the writing but have no one to read it like a marker. These are the worries that usually come with the drafts we review.
Many lecturers can't pre-mark drafts. A review gives you a marker's view while you can still change things.
We read your draft against the original feedback as well as the rubric, so every point the marker raised is checked.
Drafts often answer a nearby question. The review checks your work against the exact command words in the brief.
We check that the sections connect, nothing is repeated and no criterion fell between two people.
The review separates language problems from content problems, so you know which ones actually cost marks.
Rubrics may have changed since you last studied. The review shows how today's rubric reads your draft, criterion by criterion.
Software vs a reader
No. An assignment checker tool looks at spelling, grammar and text similarity. It cannot tell you whether you answered the question or met the rubric. A human review reads for marks.
What a checker tool looks at
What a marker-style review looks at
Illustrative comparison. Checker tools are useful for surface slips; a review answers a different question.
Self-review tonight
Run these five checks on your own draft first. If it passes all five, you may only need a proofread. If it fails two or more, a review will save you marks.
Rewrite every rubric line as a question, such as 'Have I evaluated two strategies?'. Answer yes or no honestly.
For each question, find the paragraph that answers it. If you can't point to one, that criterion is a gap.
Circle 'analyse', 'evaluate', 'justify' in the brief. Check each one has a paragraph that does exactly that, not just describes.
Every factual claim needs a citation, and every citation needs a matching entry in your reference list.
Read the question, then only your conclusion. If the conclusion doesn't answer it in plain words, the marker will notice.
Your review report
A short, clear report and your draft with comments on it. Everything is tied to your rubric, so you can see exactly where marks are at risk.
Each criterion marked as met, partly met or not yet met, with one plain-English reason.
Margin comments where the marker would hesitate: a vague claim, a missing link, a weak source.
Parts of the brief your draft hasn't covered yet, such as a counter-argument or a recommendation.
Every problem ranked by the marks at stake, so the first hour of fixing does the most good.
Criterion by criterion
Rubrics use different words, but most rubrics we see reward the same six things. Your reviewer checks each one against your own rubric's wording.
Task and question
Knowledge and theory
Analysis and evaluation
Structure and flow
Sources and referencing
Language and presentation
Sample fix list
Here is a shortened example for a 2,000-word business report. The real one follows your own rubric and covers your whole draft.
A fix list is the part students use most. Instead of fifty scattered comments, you see the few changes that matter most, in order. The top items are always the ones tied to the heaviest criteria, because that is where an hour of work moves the most marks.
Each item says where the problem is, which criterion it affects and what a good fix looks like. You can work through the list on your own, or hand any item back to your reviewer to fix for you. Nothing on the list is a guess about your grade; it is a reading of your draft against the rubric you sent.
Fix list (illustrative): business report, 2,000 words
1. Analysis, 30%: Section 3 describes the firm's pricing but never evaluates it. Add a paragraph weighing its cost against the result.
2. Task, 20%: The brief asks for two recommendations. Only one is given, and it has no reason attached.
3. Sources, 15%: Four claims in Section 2 have no citation. Two reference list entries are not cited in the text.
4. Structure, 15%: The conclusion introduces a new idea. Move it to Section 4 or remove it.
5. Language, 10%: The report is 230 words over the limit. Most of the excess is repetition in Section 1.
One student's review
A composite example of a working adult facing a resubmission, and what the review found before anything was rewritten.
Her first attempt had failed with the comment 'largely descriptive', and she had rewritten it but could not tell whether the new version was any better.
She sent the rewritten report, the rubric and the marker's original feedback. The reviewer read the draft against all three and found the same problem in a new form: the new sections explained the company's strategy in more detail, but still did not judge it. Two rubric criteria, evaluation and recommendations, had no section that clearly answered them.
The review report rated each criterion, marked the five paragraphs that described rather than evaluated, and listed the fixes in order of marks. Short on time between shifts, she asked the reviewer to rewrite the two weakest sections in tracked changes and kept the rest of her own revisions.
“I'd been rewriting the wrong thing. The fix list showed me where the marks actually were.”
She had a clear picture of every criterion three days before her deadline, with the two weakest sections fixed and every change visible. We made no promise about the mark.
Illustrative example based on common student situations, not a specific individual.
By level and programme
What a marker looks for changes with level. A diploma rubric rewards clear application; a Master's rubric expects critical judgement across the whole piece. Your reviewer reads against your level.
Diploma rubrics reward applying a concept to a real example. Reviews usually find the concept explained well but applied thinly.
marketing mix · SWOT applied to a real firm · customer research · recommendations
Typical papers
project report, group report
Frameworks are listed but not applied to the chosen company.
assessment data · nursing diagnosis · goals and interventions · evaluation
Typical papers
care plan, reflective journal
Interventions are listed without the evidence or rationale behind them.
method · results tables · error analysis · discussion
Typical papers
lab report, technical report
Results are reported but not explained against the theory.
How a review works
You know who reads your draft, what they check and when the report comes back, before you pay anything.
Add the marking descriptors, word limit, referencing style and any feedback you have had on this module.
A reply within 15 minutes, with questions or a written quote for the review fee and a return time. Nothing starts until you agree.
A nursing care plan goes to a nursing expert, a finance report to someone who knows the numbers.
Your reviewer reads the whole draft against each criterion, comments in the margin and builds the fix list.
The review is checked again before it goes out, so every comment is clear, fair and tied to your rubric.
You get the report and a short walkthrough. Ask your reviewer to fix any item, quoted before work starts.
Review, edit or rewrite
A review tells you what is wrong and what to fix first. Editing improves the language and flow of text that already answers the brief. Find the column that matches your draft.
You send
You get
Best for
Your reviewer
Reviewers are subject experts who know how Singapore rubrics are written and read. You are matched by subject and level, and the same person handles any fixes.
Showing all 8 experts
MSc | Accounting & Finance Expert
Financial Statements & Ratios, Corporate Finance (FMT modules), Investment Analysis
Jonathan covers financial reporting, ratio analysis and corporate finance questions common in SUSS FMT modules. He explains the numbers in plain words alongside the calculations.
MA | Humanities & Social Sciences Expert
Literature Reviews, Social Theory Analysis, Thesis Structuring
Daniel works on arts and social science dissertations, helping shape a clear argument across every chapter.
MTech | Computer Science & IT Expert
ANL203 / ANL307 Analytics, Python & Java, Networking & Cybersecurity
Daryl covers IT and analytics assignments, including SUSS ANL modules, explaining code and data analysis in plain language.
LLB | Contract & Commercial Law Specialist
Contract Law, Commercial Law, Business Law Assignments
Mei Ying covers contract, commercial and business law problem questions. She applies the facts step by step to the relevant rules and case law.
PhD | Linguistics & Academic Writing Expert (NUS Graduate)
Grammar & Flow, Structure & Argument, Humanities & Social Sciences
Amanda edits drafts for structure, clarity and academic tone, leaving the student's own argument intact.
PhD | Engineering & Technical Case Specialist (NTU Graduate)
Failure Analysis, Product Design, Feasibility Reports
Alvin works on engineering case studies, setting out the problem, analysis and recommendations in a logical order.
MEng | Electrical & Electronics Expert (SIT Graduate)
EEE Modules, Circuit Design & Control Systems, Power Electronics
Dev handles electrical and electronic engineering assignments, including circuit analysis, control systems and lab reports.
MSc | Mechanical Engineering Expert (NTU Graduate)
Fluid Dynamics, Thermodynamics, Machine Design
Marcus helps with mechanical engineering assignments, showing calculations step by step and explaining the engineering principles behind them.
Swipe to see more experts.
Review prices
Reviews are priced separately from writing. Your written SGD quote depends on your word count, rubric and deadline, and comes before you pay. The table below is only for sections you ask us to write or fix.
| Sections written or fixed, per 250 words | 10+ days | 3–5 days | 24 hours |
|---|---|---|---|
| General assignments | S$15 | S$20 | S$30 |
| Essays | S$18 | S$25 | S$35 |
| SUSS TMA / GBA | S$22 | S$30 | S$45 |
| PhD / dissertation | S$25 | S$35 | S$55 |
| Technical / coding | S$30 | S$45 | S$65 |
Review fee confirmed in your written quote
Free Turnitin similarity report on any section we write or fix
Check and fix quoted separately once you have seen the fix list, under our terms and conditions
Price agreed in writing before you pay
Why students trust us
Because the review is honest, private and done by a person who knows your subject. These are the reasons students give for sending us their drafts.
A subject expert writes every comment. No AI-generated feedback.
If a criterion isn't met, the report says so plainly, with the reason and the fix.
Message your reviewer on WhatsApp if a comment isn't clear.
Files are used only for your review and shared only with your expert. We never contact your institution.
A written SGD quote with the return time, and no obligation to go ahead.
Singapore students have sent us their drafts since 2010, from ITE to Master's.
Any campus, online
Yes. Reviews are done on your file and returned online, so students at NUS, NTU, SMU, SUSS, SIM, the polytechnics and ITE all work with the same reviewers.
Other checks
If you already know the content is right, a lighter check may be enough. These services cover the language, the references and AI-written passages.
Draft not started yet? An expert can write the assignment from your brief. To see the standard a review measures against, browse real assignment briefs we've outlined or briefs other students sent us. Ready to send it? Use the submit assignment page.
Review FAQs
Answers on what a review covers, deadlines, fixes, privacy and price.
A review reads your finished draft like a marker. You get a comment on every rubric criterion, the weak spots and missing parts marked, and a fix list in order of marks. Editing works on the language: grammar, flow and academic English, in tracked changes. A review tells you what to fix; editing improves how it reads. Many students start with a review, then fix the content before any polish.
Checker tools are good at spelling, grammar and similarity matches, and you should use them. They cannot tell whether you answered the question, evaluated rather than described, or met each rubric criterion. That needs a person who knows your subject and reads the brief. A review covers what software can't see, so the two work well together.
No. Only your marker can give a grade, and no honest service can guarantee or predict one. The review rates each criterion as met, partly met or not yet met against your rubric's wording, explains why, and shows what would strengthen it. That tells you where marks are at risk without pretending to know the final number.
Often, yes. Send your draft, rubric and deadline and we reply within 15 minutes, with questions or a written SGD quote and a return time, so you know before paying whether there is enough time to act on the fix list. The earlier you send it, the more time you have to fix things, or to ask your reviewer to fix them for you.
Your draft, the assignment brief and the rubric or marking descriptors. Add the word limit, referencing style, any module learning outcomes, and feedback from earlier assignments in the same module. If your lecturer shared exemplars or a template, include those too. The more of the marker's own material we have, the closer the review gets to how your work will be read.
Yes. Choose any items on the fix list and the same reviewer rewrites those sections in tracked changes, so you can see every change. Fixes are quoted separately in writing once you have seen the fix list, and nothing starts until you agree. Some students fix the easy items themselves and hand over the one or two hardest sections.
Yes. The reviewer reviews what is there and notes which criteria have no section yet. If you are short of time, an expert can also finish the missing sections in the same argument and voice, then the whole draft is reviewed together. Tell us which parts are complete so the quote covers the right work.
Yes, and this is one of the most useful reviews. Send the original feedback with your new draft. The reviewer checks each feedback point to see if the new version has really dealt with it, as well as checking the rubric. Resubmissions often fix the wording of a problem without fixing the problem, and the review shows where.
Your reviewer flags passages that read generic or off-topic, and checks that the sources you cite can be found and say what you claim. We do not run or promise any AI detector score. If parts were drafted with AI, our AI content removal service rewrites them as original work with real sources, and helps you complete your AI-use declaration honestly.
By a person. A subject expert reads your draft and writes every comment and every item on the fix list. We do not use AI to write feedback, rewrite sections or create references. The review is checked again before it reaches you, so the comments are clear and tied to your own rubric.
Yes. Message your reviewer on WhatsApp about any comment, and you also get a short walkthrough of the report when it is returned. If you want to go through every point in detail, you can book a live session on your reviewed draft. A review is only useful if you understand what it is telling you.
Singapore has no specific law against academic review, editing or writing services. Each university, polytechnic and PEI sets its own rules on outside help and on AI use, and you are responsible for following your institution's rules. Check your module handbook or honour code, and ask us if you are unsure what kind of help your module allows.
No. Singapore Assignment Help is an independent service. We are not affiliated with, approved by or connected to any university, polytechnic, ITE campus or private education institution. Our reviewers read your work against the rubric you send us, not any inside knowledge of your course or your marker.
Files you upload are used only for your review and are shared only with your expert, the reviewer on your order. They are handled under Singapore's PDPA, never shared with your institution and never published. We delete files after your order ends unless you ask us to keep them for follow-up work, and you can ask us to delete them earlier at any time.
A review is priced separately from writing, by word count, rubric length and return time, and you get a written SGD quote before paying. It is usually the most efficient first step, because it shows whether your draft needs a light edit, a few fixes or more. If you then want sections fixed or rewritten, our writing rates per 250 words apply.
Send your draft
Send your draft and rubric now. A reviewer replies within 15 minutes with a written SGD quote and a return time, and nothing starts until you agree.
100% online · Reply within 15 minutes · Clear SGD quote first · PDPA compliant