What we will help with — and what we strictly won’t.

Every mentor in the cohort follows this code; every new cohort member agrees to it on joining. The rest of this page is what the code means in concrete situations.

1. What we will help with

The club exists to make IOL preparation more effective and less lonely. Within the bounds of academic integrity, we actively help with:

• +
  Working through past problems (already-published archive problems, not active-contest problems). The mentor explains solving methods, points out common mistakes, and walks through worked examples.
• +
  Explaining a problem category in general (e.g. “how do vowel-harmony problems usually work?”, “what is ergativity?”). This is fair game whether or not you’ve personally faced such a problem.
• +
  Pointing you to study resources (books, national-olympiad archives, online courses). The mentor curates rather than provides answers.
• +
  Reviewing your written solution to a past problem after you’ve completed it. Feedback on clarity, completeness, and rubric alignment.
• +
  Discussing IOL strategy (which problems to attempt first, how to allocate six hours, how to write reasoning under time pressure).
• +
  Connecting you to alumni for general advice about preparation, university applications, or post-contest paths.

2. What we strictly won’t help with

The following are firm “no”s regardless of how the request is framed. The mentor will decline these in writing and explain why; repeated requests for any of these may result in cohort removal.

• ×
  Solving an active-contest problem. If your national selection round is currently in progress (or for IOL itself, during the contest week), we will not look at any problem from that round — not even to “check” your reasoning. Wait until the round closes.
• ×
  Looking up answer keys for problems you’re being tested on. The mentor will not share or help you find solutions for any problem that is part of your current selection round, an in-progress practice contest, or a school assignment.
• ×
  Writing your problem solutions for you. The mentor reviews your written work; the mentor does not produce it. If you ask the mentor to “draft a solution for you to copy”, the answer is no.
• ×
  Coordinating with other contestants during a contest. The WhatsApp group goes quiet on contest days — mentor and members are expected not to discuss problems until the round closes for everyone.
• ×
  Writing your university application essays about IOL preparation. The mentor will discuss general experiences but will not draft or substantially edit your personal statement.
• ×
  Sharing other contestants’ solutions or scores without their explicit permission. Past walkthroughs may credit a method to a named past contestant only with that contestant’s consent.

3. The grey-area test

Most ambiguous cases resolve quickly with one test: would the contestant whose work would be affected approve of this help? If a NACLO student asks for tips on phonology problems in general, all past NACLO contestants would say “fine, that’s preparation”. If the same student asks for help solving last weekend’s NACLO problem before the answer key is published, past NACLO contestants would say “no, that’s cheating”.

When you’re not sure, ask the mentor explicitly. Asking is always safe; assuming and then crossing the line is not.

4. After a contest closes

Once a national olympiad’s round has officially closed and the contest is no longer active (results published, answer keys released by the organisers), those problems join the past archive and we’re happy to walk through them. Many contestants’ single biggest learning happens in the week after a contest, comparing notes with peers and mentors. That is encouraged.

For IOL itself: post-contest analysis begins after the closing ceremony in Bucharest (or wherever a given year is hosted). Solvers’ choice walkthroughs typically appear on ioling.org within several weeks; we cross-link those rather than producing our own competing analysis.

5. School academic integrity policies

Many of our cohort members attend schools with their own academic integrity policies. Where a school’s policy is stricter than ours, follow the school’s policy. The mentor will respect any cohort member’s request to avoid discussing topics that overlap with current school coursework.

If a school’s policy is unclear about whether olympiad mentoring constitutes “outside help”, we recommend disclosing the cohort to your teacher. In our experience teachers approve once they understand what we do; transparency removes ambiguity.

6. Reporting concerns

If you observe a cohort member or mentor crossing one of the firm “no” lines above, message the editorial team via the contact channel and mention “integrity concern”. Reports are treated as confidential. We investigate, document the outcome, and act — including cohort removal where warranted.

False or vexatious reports themselves violate the honor code. We’ve never had to remove a member for reporting issues, and we hope never to. The bar for “warranted concern” is low; the bar for “make stuff up” is high.

7. Why this matters

The International Linguistics Olympiad works because contestants trust each other and the contest. Every solution-sharing breach erodes that trust — not just for the contestant involved, but for everyone who relied on the contest’s fairness. Your future cohort-mates and competitors are watching how you prepare.

The good news: the bar for “ethical preparation” is low. Most of what builds an IOL medalist is just working a lot of past problems with care and attention, with a mentor or alumnus to talk to when stuck. None of that requires crossing any line.