Nowadays, there is a number of Olympiads held on a regular basis, and it is difficult to comprehend the value of a particular Olympiad or a medal to someone unfamiliar with the movement. To solve this issue, our %link% evaluates each Olympiad in five categories:
On each Olympiad's page, you will find our assessment of each category at a 5-point scale. Here is our suggestion of an algorithm for evaluation of each category.
Regrettably, an institute of academic integrity is virtually non-existent in Kazakhstan. At times we come across a case when students obtain (or even buy) assignments prior to the start of an Olympiad, and at other times we observe biased jury members who purposely train their students on topics that would later appear at an Olympiad. Moreover, such cases almost always go unpunished: students whose fate depends on those individuals are witnesses of such events.
For this reason, we have added a third category: credibility. Should our team never encounter violations of academic integrity at an Olympiad, it receives a neutral rating. Should we ever face a minor controversial moment, which we may consider enough to raise questions - we put a question mark in our evaluation. If we encounter a serious academic integrity violation, then one exclamation mark is put in the category. In case of systematic violations, we place from two to three exclamation marks depending on its severity.
In extremely rare cases when we feel confident that the organizers take proactive stance on academic integrity, we tick the box for full credibility. At such Olympiads, the organizers are not afraid to take responsibility to disqualify participants who were suspected of violating academic integrity.
Note: Olympiad rating in this category is solely subjective to the opinion of the Fund's expert circle. If you consider us not competent enough to issue such rating, you can only operate in the first two categories.