The Pitfalls of Manual Scoring in Tajweed Competitions

Over the years, I have had the privilege—and sometimes the headache—of being part of dozens of Quran competitions. My roles have varied: judge, supervisor, and occasionally, someone guiding the participants through the nuances of Tajweed. Through these experiences, I have witnessed the beauty and dedication that children and adults alike invest in perfecting their recitation. But I have also observed, year after year, how manual scoring processes can cloud what should be a joyous and spiritually uplifting experience. Let me share some honest reflections and practical insights on the challenges of manual scoring in Tajweed competitions, and why a closer look at our marking systems is overdue.

Understanding the Essence of Tajweed Evaluation

Evaluating Tajweed is unlike marking a spelling test or a handwriting competition. We are measuring fluency, correctness, proper enunciation, and the soulful application of centuries-old oral tradition. Judges are human—with human challenges—tasked to assess not only technical correctness but also beauty and presence. The tools they use and the process they follow make an enormous difference to the outcome and the participant experience.

Traditionally, scoring in Tajweed competitions has been conducted with pen and paper. This approach has a certain nostalgic charm, but beneath the surface lies a host of practical issues. These are not just minor inconveniences—they have the potential to affect fairness, accuracy, and even the reputation of the competition.

The Everyday Realities of Manual Scoring

Let’s be candid—manual scoring asks a lot of our judges and the organisational team. At every stage, from noting down marks while listening, through to collating scores at the end, the system depends heavily on human attention, impartiality, and stamina. Here are some of the main pitfalls that I and my colleagues have observed, sometimes the hard way:

1. Human Error and Inconsistency

Scoring Tajweed manually is a precise task that demands continuous attention. But recitations can be lengthy, and judges are only human. Some common issues I have seen include:

• Misrecorded Scores: When trying to mark and listen simultaneously, it is easy to jot down the wrong number or tick the wrong box.
• Lost or Mixed-Up Sheets: With dozens of participants and several judges, paperwork can go astray, leading to confusion and stressful last-minute searching.
• Inconsistent Standards: Fatigue, hunger, or distraction may cause a judge to be stricter (or more lenient) in the morning than in the afternoon. This can skew results unfairly.

One year, I recall a case where a judge’s score sheet was found in a completely different pile, only for us to discover it after the awards had already been announced. The embarrassment was palpable, and correcting the mistake was awkward for everyone involved.

2. Difficulty in Standardising Criteria

Tajweed marking schemes can be complex, covering articulation points, rules of elongation, nasalisation, emphatic letters, and more. Manual systems often rely on the judge’s ability to keep all this in memory, or to interpret marking instructions on the spot. The consequences?

• Subjectivity: Even with clear criteria, the application may differ from judge to judge, especially when marks are not instantly recalculated or cross-checked.
• Inadequate Feedback: With rapid-fire marking, the notes left for participants can be scant or unclear, reducing the value of the feedback and making improvement harder.

3. Administrative Burden and Delays

Anyone who has organised a competition knows the administrative mountain involved: collecting judging sheets, ensuring all columns are filled, transcribing marks into master spreadsheets, and triple-checking totals. Manual scoring directly adds to this burden in several ways:

• Slow Results: Tallying manually, especially with large groups, takes significant time. Participants may be left waiting anxiously for the results.
• High Risk of Mathematical Errors: Arithmetic errors (addition, transposition, missed scores) are all too common, sometimes only discovered when participants or parents challenge the outcome.

I remember a national competition where, after several rounds of addition and cross-checking, we still had to re-announce winners due to a calculation error. The trust and confidence of both contestants and parents were affected.

The Effects on Participants and the Competition Atmosphere

For all the focus on process, it is the participants who feel the impact most keenly. An error on a score sheet may be minor inconvenience for an organiser, but it can be much more serious for a dedicated young reciter who has spent months in preparation. Some consequences I have witnessed:

• Distrust in Judging: When errors occur, or when feedback is inconsistent, participants (and their parents) may lose faith in the fairness of the event.
• Demotivation: When feedback is vague or mistaken, participants are left uncertain about where they need to improve, sapping their enthusiasm and progress.
• Delays and Tension: Long waits for results, or changes to rankings after results announcements, can create unnecessary tension and disappointment.

Our goal, always, should be to encourage love for the Quran and to support the development of sound recitation. When manual scoring gets in the way of this aim, it is time to reassess our approach.

Challenges Specific to Team and Multi-Round Competitions

When competitions move to team formats, multiple rounds, or regional finals, the pitfalls of manual scoring multiply:

• Difficulty Comparing Results: Handwritten sheets from different locations can be hard to match up, slowing down regional or national finals.
• Complicated Aggregation: Combining scores across judges or rounds for overall winners is much more error-prone when handled manually.
• Lost Opportunities for Data Analysis: Without a digital record, trends and areas for community-wide improvement are obscured.

Practical Steps and Advice from Experience

While these pitfalls are real and well documented, change is possible. From many years’ experience, here are some humble suggestions for those still working with manual systems:

• Rigorous Training and Standardisation: Take time to brief all judges together. Use worked examples and, if possible, run a mock round to align interpretations.
• Double Marking and Cross-Checks: Where possible, have a second judge cross-check critical errors, especially for younger or less experienced competitors.
• Clear, Pre-Prepared Marking Sheets: Invest effort in designing sheets that are crystal clear and leave no room for ambiguity. Colour-coding and concise instructions can help.
• Immediate Feedback Sessions: Whenever possible, speak personally to participants about their scores and areas to improve, rather than relying solely on written feedback.
• Back-Up Systems: Always have spare sheets, pens, and folders. Arrange for safe collection and handover of all scoring paperwork between each round.

The Case for Embracing Marking Technology

Change can be daunting, especially in environments rooted in tradition and communal trust. However, as the scale and seriousness of Quran competitions have grown, so has the responsibility to safeguard their credibility and positive impact. Digital marking tools are not a panacea, but they do address many of the pitfalls detailed here:

• Automatic Tomal Calculations: Eliminate arithmetic errors instantly, letting judges focus on assessment instead of maths.
• Consistent, Real-Time Scoring: Digital checklists or scoring apps help ensure uniformity across judges and rounds.
• Instant Feedback: Participants and parents can receive detailed breakdowns, making the entire process more transparent and more valuable.
• Data Preservation: Scores cannot be lost, mixed up, or illegible, and they can be reviewed later for further learning or appeals.
• Faster Results: With scores collated electronically, delays and tension around announcements are greatly reduced.

Ultimately, technology should be seen as a tool to uphold the spiritual and communal goals of Quran competitions, not as a replacement for the human touch and expertise of experienced judges.

Conclusion: Keeping the Focus on Learning and Joy

Every Tajweed competition is an opportunity for growth, for both participants and organisers. While manual scoring methods have served us for generations, their pitfalls are becoming increasingly apparent as competitions become larger and more visible. By reflecting honestly on these challenges and being open to change—be it in processes, training, or tools—we can ensure our events are fair, accurate, and truly enriching for everyone involved.

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