Editorial Guidelines

Our goal is to answer a specific reader question accurately and make the next learning step actionable.

Last updated: July 19, 2026

Responsibility and scope

EducateAI operates this blog. Articles are assigned either to a named person or to the EducateAI Editorial Team. We display a named subject-matter reviewer only when that review actually took place and is documented internally.

Learning and AI content may contain errors or become outdated as research, university rules, and products change. We therefore place sources, limitations, and scope close to the statements they qualify.

Visible responsibility belongs to Pierre Illsley or the EducateAI Editorial Team, depending on the byline. All profiles are listed on our authors page.

How we select topics

A new article or substantial refresh needs:

  • a specific reader question or task,
  • one canonical page owner,
  • evidence of demand or a recurring user problem,
  • distinct value beyond existing EducateAI pages,
  • a rule for measurement and later review.

Search volume alone does not justify an article. Forums and social networks can reveal problem language and workflows, but they do not replace primary evidence for research, legal, institutional, or product claims.

Research and sources

  • We trace research claims to original studies, systematic reviews, or official institutions when those sources are available.
  • We check prices, policies, capabilities, and other time-sensitive details against a current official source and record the review date in the editorial evidence.
  • A single personal account may illustrate a problem, but it cannot establish general effectiveness.
  • We label uncertain conclusions as editorial judgments or hypotheses.

Concrete reader value

An article should do more than summarize information. Depending on the reader task, we add a worked process, before-and-after example, comparison, template, test, or verifiable decision aid. We also explain when the method is not a good fit.

EducateAI product statements

We check statements about EducateAI against the current product, a live test, or the technical implementation. Relevant limitations belong next to the statement, including file type, OCR, source quality, usage rights, plan, or privacy constraints. We add a product link only when EducateAI genuinely supports the next step described.

Comparisons and conflicts of interest

EducateAI may appear in comparisons even though we operate the product. We disclose that relationship in the article. Criteria, test material, and limitations should be reproducible. Paid placements or affiliate relationships are labeled and do not determine our editorial recommendation.

AI assistance

AI may assist with research, structure, translation, drafting, and editing. It is not a source and does not hold editorial responsibility. Before publication, a person reviews the sources, examples, product statements, and visible content. We do not publish invented tests, experiences, authors, or reviewers.

Updates and corrections

  • We prioritize reviews based on change risk, search and reader feedback, and product or policy changes. We do not promise a blanket annual review of every article.
  • We update the modified date for a meaningful content change, not for a cosmetic edit.
  • We correct confirmed factual errors. Material corrections or changes are explained in the article or its editorial record.

Feedback

Readers can rate usefulness at the end of each article. Factual concerns and correction suggestions can also be sent through the EducateAI contact page. We review reports based on relevance and risk, but cannot promise a fixed response time.