Level 1 · factual writing

Write vividly without inventing

Language and exercises updated 16 September 2026 at 17:42 CEST (Norway)

Practise factual writing that feels clear and alive, with a visible source behind every important claim.

A documented detail can draw a reader in. An unsupported scene can do the same, at the cost of truth. This course helps you find the movement and interest already present in the material.

Course concept and original method: Bjørn Moe Aldema · Human adaptation and editorial development: Experimental Newsroom human–AI collaboration · Published by: Experimental Newsroom · First published: 2 September 2026

You begin with a source set that has clear boundaries.

Work with a small, defined collection of documents, interviews, observations or data.

You create five pieces of work that can be examined.

Produce a text of 250–450 words, a map of its claims, a five-line plan, an intentionally overstated comparison and a revision note.

You should allow about 100 minutes for the course.

You can do the writing alone. A separate reader then evaluates the text before hearing what you intended.

You can inspect the course before registering

The seven parts lead from source material to a tested factual text.

The preview explains each stage. The full course includes instructions, a constructed example, working tables, the final assignment and self-assessment.

You find an anchor that the sources can carry.

Choose a supported detail, precise fact or open question for the beginning. Identify its source before building the opening around it.

You build movement without manufacturing suspense.

Try five steps: an anchor, tension, development, a turn and a return. A documented limitation or contrast can change how the reader understands the opening. Keep only the steps your material supports; some subjects need a direct explanation or an open ending.

You give every important claim a visible status.

Map what is documented, what a source claims, what you infer, what is openly reconstructed and what remains unknown. This lets the prose vary without blurring its basis.

You move deliberately between detail and explanation.

Detail gives the subject presence; explanation helps the reader connect its parts. Ask what each paragraph contributes and whether its evidence supports that contribution.

You compare a thin version, an invented version and a controlled version.

A constructed library example compares three results from the same sources: accurate but lifeless, vivid but unsupported, and readable with clear evidence. Examine the sentences where their paths diverge.

You revise for truth, movement and human consequence in separate passes.

First check facts, actors, quotations and certainty. Then follow the movement between paragraphs. Finally, replace empty praise or alarm with precise actions and human consequences.

You complete an assignment that another reader can actually test.

Finish the text before explaining it. Ask a reader to mark what is clear, what needs support and where their attention falters. Use those observations to choose the next revision.

TRY

You can try this exercise without registering

Write a five-line movement and test every line against its source.

Choose a small subject with at least one reliable source. Read the example below, then try the five lines with your own material.

A short comparison

Invented practice material: a library notice says evening opening hours will begin on 1 October. No attendance figures or reader interviews are available.

Unsupported opening: “The new evening hours will bring lonely residents together.” This predicts attendance, relationships and feelings that the notice cannot establish.

Supported opening: “The library will stay open later from 1 October, according to its notice. Whether residents use the extra hours remains to be seen.” This gives the reader a change, a date and a question for later reporting.

In your own source, look for a detail with the same practical role: something that changes what people can do. Keep any expected benefit attributed to the person or document making that prediction.

Write the anchor. Give the reader a concrete, documented starting point.
Name the tension. State what is unresolved, difficult or changing without predicting the outcome.
Develop the picture. Add a source, fact or explanation that makes the issue more intelligible.
Introduce the turn. Use a real limitation, contrast or fact that changes how the first line should be understood.
Return to the opening. Show what the reader can now see that was not visible in the first line alone.

You finish by checking the boundary.

Point to evidence for each line. Where the material cannot support a full sequence, keep the gap visible rather than supplying an invented connection.

The method produces work that can be challenged

You practise, attempt to disprove your own draft and invite an independent reading.

The course asks you to produce writing that can be challenged. An intentionally polished but unsupported version helps locate the boundary. A separate reader then examines the finished text without being coached on your intention.

Ask the independent reader to summarise the main point, mark any claim they cannot trace to the source set and identify a passage they had to reread. Revise those passages, then check whether the revision has lost a qualification, detail or voice worth keeping. Preserve the earlier version so that the comparison remains possible.

Artificial intelligence may help you explore structures, contrast versions, formulate questions and revise language. A human remains responsible for selecting sources, verifying material claims, assessing privacy and harm, deciding whether to publish and correcting errors.

Requesting the course does one thing: it gives Experimental Newsroom permission to use your email address to answer that request. It does not automatically subscribe you to marketing or course updates. The optional update choice is presented separately below.