Editorial Standards

Fractus Learning strives to provide the most up-to-date, interesting and authoritative information on education – in all it’s forms. Our primary goal is to make sure both educators and parents can come away better informed and entertained after reading our articles.

Therefore we want to be clear about the process we use to gather and represent the information in our articles.

This begins with what topics and interests we decide to cover. We are always looking for promising educational topics that are interesting to our readers. We also look for topics generating questions from parents and teachers on social media and in various online forums. Finally, we often have readers ask us to cover topics.

Editing Process

The editing process is an essential part of our work. In order to ensure the highest quality of our content, we prioritize writers with deep knowledge and experience in the topics they cover. For example, we assign trained science teachers to write about STEM stories, and we choose writers who have extensively covered childhood development for our articles on early childhood schooling.

While we aim to cover breaking news promptly, accuracy takes precedence over speed. Therefore, before any story is published, it undergoes a thorough review by at least one senior experienced editor. They carefully examine each article for factual correctness, spelling errors, institutional affiliations, and clarity of content. This meticulous fact-checking and editing process guarantees the reliability and professionalism of our publications.

Interviews and Sourcing:

Fractus Learning strives to paint a thorough and accurate picture of the science behind any phenomenon. As such, when we interview people, we look for experts who are knowledgeable about the particular topic at hand, not just the general field of study, and who can provide important context and background information.

If we are covering a controversial study or findings that have raised skepticism in the scientific community, we will always reach out to both sides so they have a chance to comment and defend their position before a story goes live.

We also want to make clear exactly how our information was obtained. So we always make clear whether information was drawn from a study, a press release, or from an email or phone interview with a source. We link to the source of our information wherever possible, assuming it’s not common knowledge, meaning not known by someone with about a 10th-grade education. If we draw information from another news source, we will link to and cite that source.

When pulling information from written sources, we look for the most reliable sources. We prioritize expert interviews, primary sources, peer-reviewed journal articles, book excerpts and information from government and official websites, such as those of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, over secondary sources.

We do not tolerate plagiarism, meaning unattributed use of phrases or sentences from other sources or outlets.

If a study author has a conflict of interest or financial ties to a drug company, we disclose that connection. Our writers are prohibited from taking money from sources, and if they have a prior relationship with an interview source (such as a friendship or research relationship), we will disclose that relationship.

Sourcing and Interviews

Fractus Learning strives to paint a thorough and accurate picture for our readers. As such, when we interview people, we look for experts who are knowledgeable about the particular topic at hand, not just the general field of study, and who can provide important context and background information.

When pulling information from written sources, we look for the most reliable sources. We do not tolerate plagiarism, meaning unattributed use of phrases or sentences from other sources or outlets.

Errors and Corrections

Mistakes do happen on occasion. When we make a mistake, we fix it immediately and place an editors note on the story if the correction is significant. We will fix typos or spelling errors with issuing a correction.