When Great Students Get Underscored: The Marking Problem

Introduction: The Unexpected Outcome

Across several years of involvement in Quran competitions — from teaching dedicated students to sitting at the judge’s table and supporting organisers behind the scenes — I have witnessed countless young hearts rise to the occasion. The anticipation, hope, and immense effort poured into every recitation is profound. Yet, among the many triumphs and inspiring stories, one persistent problem has surfaced many times, leaving both participants and mentors puzzled: great students getting underscored.

For those not familiar with the term, “underscored” refers to students receiving lower marks than expected, often regardless of their actual merit or performance. This issue is deeper and more complex than the occasional mistake or oversight. It is a systemic challenge, impacting motivation, trust in the process, and – at times – the collective morale of budding Huffaz and their supporters.

This article explores why it happens, how organisers and judges can address it, and what competitors and teachers can do in response. My aim is to offer an honest, grounded view, drawing on real experiences – because this problem will not go away simply with platitudes.

The Making of the Marking Problem

To a casual observer, Quran competition marking may seem straightforward: check for errors, tick boxes, assign a score. In reality, the process is nuanced, shaped by a blend of criteria, human judgement, and sometimes, subjective interpretation.

• Marking Criteria: Most competitions break down marks into memorisation accuracy, tajwid (pronunciation rules), fluency, and sometimes presentation. Each criterion is theoretically objective, but their interpretation can vary.
• The Human Element: Even the most experienced judge brings personal standards, prior experiences, and, subconsciously, expectations shaped by previous competitors.
• Environmental Factors: Fatigue, time pressure, and even background noise in live sessions can subtly affect a judge’s focus and decisions.

Add to this the challenge of large numbers of participants, variable organisational procedures, and sometimes ambiguous rules, and you have a situation primed for marking inconsistencies.

Common Scenarios Where Great Students Get Underscored

• Strict or Inconsistent Application of Criteria: One judge may prioritise tajwid over memorisation; another views even minor hesitations harshly.
• Miscommunication on Rules: Rules are sometimes updated but not clearly conveyed, leading judges and students to prepare by different standards.
• Fatigue or Bias: In lengthy competitions, judges tire and may mark more harshly in later sessions or unintentionally favour or penalise certain groups out of subconscious bias.
• Technical Issues: In virtual competitions, audio glitches or connectivity issues can obscure recitations, leading to unfair deductions.

The Human Stories Behind the Scores

It is easy to view marking mistakes as statistical anomalies, but in practice, every underscored student has a journey that brought them to that stage. I remember a young student, Hassan, who had been meticulously coached for months, possessing not only near-flawless memorisation but a heart-warming presence. On his competition day, a minor slip in his recitation, which he immediately self-corrected, led to a harsh deduction. The confidence and quiet joy he entered with faded when the scores were announced, and neither he nor his teacher could fully understand why.

In another instance, a competitor from a smaller town — with a dialectal accent unfamiliar to the judging panel — was marked down for what were perceived as tajwid errors. Later, in discussions, it became clear the articulation was correct within his regional context, but the lack of exposure among the judges sealed his fate.

Behind each low score is an untold story – of daily revision, of overcoming personal hurdles, of hope invested not only by the student but also by their family and teachers. When the marking does not match the standard observed in training and practice, the resultant disappointment is not quickly shaken off.

Lived Lessons from the Judge’s Table

As a regular judge, I confess: the job is both a privilege and a pressure. The desire to uphold fairness is real, yet mistakes do creep in, sometimes due to fatigue, other times because of grey areas in pronunciation or varied interpretations of scoring rubrics. Here are a few practical lessons learnt, often the hard way:

• Pre-Competition Alignment: The most successful competitions I’ve seen begin with a thorough, pre-event calibration, where judges listen to sample recordings and debate grading until everyone’s on the same page.
• Written Guidelines Help, But are Not Enough: Marking rubrics must be detailed, ideally with case studies or “edge-case” examples. But ongoing feedback loops are equally important.
• Breaks and Rotation: Scheduling regular breaks for judges – especially during full-day events – helps to maintain focus and consistency.
• Open Communication Channels: It should be normal for any party to ask for clarifications, whether it’s a teacher, student, or judge, without fear of offending anyone’s expertise.

Organisational Insights: Structure Shapes Fairness

As an organiser, I have seen how much competition structure shapes outcomes. Some decisions that seem administrative—such as how results are checked or the marking tools used—make a world of difference.

• Multiple Judges and Averaging: When marks are averaged across several judges, the impact of one-off harshness or leniency is softened.
• Anonymity, Where Possible: In some settings, anonymising recitations (especially virtual ones) reduces bias. It’s not always possible but can be valuable for advanced rounds.
• Clear Appeals Process: Even if only a few appeals are allowed, their existence reassures participants that apparent discrepancies will be reviewed by a neutral panel.
• Debrief and Feedback Sessions: After every event, structured feedback sessions for judges and teachers encourage reflective improvement – especially when combined with data showing score variations between judges.
• Reliable Marking Tools: Investing in robust digital marking tools — with features like error tracking, time-stamping, and cross-judge analysis — not only streamlines the process but can flag inconsistencies in real-time.

In my experience, competitions that treat marking as a process to be continually refined, rather than a fixed stage, produce more trust and better outcomes year after year.

Advice for Students, Teachers, and Parents

It is only natural to feel upset when expected marks do not materialise. Over the years, I have found it helpful to share, especially with committed students, the following advice:

• Focus on the Process, Not Just the Result: Competitions are a milestone, not the whole journey. The habits and discipline acquired are the real prize.
• Approach Each Event as a Learning Opportunity: Every feedback – fair or not – can be mined for growth. Ask for judge comments, seek clarification, and reflect on performance details.
• Separate Self-Worth from the Score: Low marks, especially when unexpected, can dent motivation. Remind students (and yourself) that no single event defines their relationship with the Quran.
• Speak Up Respectfully: If a marking decision feels off, there is no harm in politely seeking clarification through official channels. Sometimes an explanation emerges; other times, gaps in the process are highlighted for organisers to fix.
• Maintain Perspective as a Teacher or Parent: Model responses that prioritise encouragement and constructive critique over disappointment or anger. Lore is built not by scores, but by resilience and sustained effort.

The Road Ahead: Making Fair Marking the Norm

No system is perfect, and no judge is infallible. But with collective commitment, Quran competitions can move closer towards fairness and transparency. Robust marking depends on:

• Continuous judge training and calibration
• Open channels for feedback from all stakeholders
• Strong, well-communicated guidelines
• Embracing new tools for digital marking and score analysis

Most importantly, it relies on remembering the purpose of these gatherings: to honour and inspire love for the Quran. That higher aim must shape every decision, especially when navigating the unavoidable grey zones of competitive marking.

To every student who has ever felt underscored, and to every teacher who sits beside them: your effort is seen. Keep going, keep asking questions; and whenever you have the chance, help strengthen the process for those who follow.

If you need help with your Quran competition platform or marking tools, email info@qurancompetitions.tech.