E-Learning Developers Editing and Proofreading Services

E-learning is consumed alone, without a tutor to notice confusion, by someone who has been told to complete it and would rather be doing their job. The learner clicks through, answers the questions, and the system records completion. Whether anything was learned is largely determined by a category of writing nobody assigns to a specialist: the on-screen instructions, the question stems, and above all the feedback that appears after an answer.

We edit what e-learning developers and digital learning teams produce — on-screen text and narration scripts, module and screen-level instructions, interaction and activity prompts, question stems and answer options, feedback text for correct and incorrect responses, scenario and branching dialogue, character and avatar dialogue, navigation and interface copy, accessibility text including alternative descriptions and captions, module descriptions and catalogue copy, completion and certificate wording, learner support and troubleshooting content, storyboard documentation for developers, and localisation source files. Our editors write for a reader with no one to ask.

Feedback on a wrong answer is the highest-value writing in a module and is almost always wasted. "Incorrect. Try again" tells a learner nothing except that they failed, and "Incorrect. The correct answer is B" ends the interaction without teaching anything, because the learner never finds out why they thought it was C. We write feedback so it addresses the specific misconception behind each wrong option rather than restating the right one — a learner who chose C believed something, and naming that belief is the entire teaching moment; so correct-answer feedback confirms the reasoning rather than only the outcome, because a learner can be right for the wrong reason and will be wrong next time; so the tone treats the error as ordinary, since e-learning is completed by adults who resent being scolded by a screen; and so the feedback is written per-option rather than per-question, which costs three extra sentences and converts a click-through into the only real instruction the module contains.

Everything you send is treated in confidence, including unreleased modules and client material. We are editors rather than instructional designers or accessibility auditors, and we offer no view on learning design, on technical implementation, or on conformance with any accessibility standard. What we can do is make the on-screen writing clear and the feedback teach something.