How to Make Quran Competitions More Transparent: Lessons from the Inside

Over the past decade, I’ve had the privilege—and at times, the heavy responsibility—of being deeply involved with Quran competitions in various capacities. I’ve sat on both sides of the judge’s table, helped organise regional and national events, mentored dozens of students through the nervous lead-up, and fielded anxious queries from their parents afterwards. Through these experiences, I’ve seen firsthand how a lack of transparency—sometimes unintentional, often due to ingrained habits—can undermine trust among participants, parents, audience members, and even among organisers themselves.

Transparency isn’t simply about fending off accusations of bias or unfairness. It’s about making the competition a positive, growthful experience for everyone—about celebrating Quranic excellence, encouraging humility, and ensuring justice, in the truest Islamic sense, prevails. In this blog post, I want to share practical lessons that can help us all move towards more transparent Quran competitions. My hope is that these insights will spark honest discussions and perhaps inspire some practical changes, big or small, wherever you’re involved.

Setting the Ground Rules: Clearer Guidelines for All

Much of the ambiguity in Quran competitions begins before a single ayah is recited—right at the point of registration and rules distribution. In my early years as an organiser, the rulebook was simply a faded photocopy, full of vague phrasing and “organiser’s discretion” entries.

• Provide Public, Written Guidelines: Make a comprehensive competition guide accessible to all: rules for memorisation, tajweed, pronunciation, dress code, eligibility, time limits, and any other criteria. This should be easily downloadable and reviewed regularly.
• Offer Sample Marking Sheets: Publish anonymised examples from past marking sheets (marking guides), so participants can understand how points are awarded and where marks can be lost. This demystifies the process for students and their teachers.
• Specify What “Judge’s Discretion” Means: If certain aspects are left to personal judgment, spell out the possible range of decisions and the factors that could influence an outcome. Vague rules can be manipulated or perceived as unfair even if applied without malice.

Practical Example: The year we posted our marking sheet templates two months before the competition, teacher queries dropped dramatically. Students felt more at ease, knowing exactly what judges would be looking for, which let them focus on recitation instead of speculating about potential pitfalls.

Transparent Selection and Training of Judges

Judges are the backbone of any Quran competition. The integrity of the process depends on their expertise, fairness, and—crucially—the public’s perception of their impartiality. However, controversies often arise when parents or participants see unfamiliar faces or suspect hidden connections.

• Declare Judge Selection Criteria: Detail qualifications (e.g., standard of hifz, tajweed certification, teaching experience), years of experience, and, where practical, list the names and affiliations of judges publicly before the event.
• Rotate Judges: Avoid repeatedly selecting judges from the same schools, mosques, or regions. Regularly bring in respected external judges, even if it means arranging for remote participation.
• Conflict of Interest Policy: Judges should not mark direct relatives, students they actively coach, or participants from their home institute. This should be stated in writing and enforced, even if it requires extra coordination.
• Consistent Judge Training: Hold pre-event calibration sessions where judges collectively review sample recitations and marking. This closes the interpretation gap and ensures more consistent scoring.

In one city-wide competition, we invited a well-known Qari from a far-off region to join our judge panel each year. His presence, together with a clear conflict-of-interest policy, nipped the usual complaints of “in-group favouritism” in the bud. Parents were still competitive, as always, but they trusted the process more visibly.

Handling the Marking Process: Openness and Accountability

The actual scoring is where most transparency issues arise: whispers of “that judge is always strict with our kids,” or “her cousin is in the other group,” or “I heard they change the marks after the event.” These concerns often stem from confusion, not malice.

• Use Standardised Scoring Tools: Whether paper or digital, every judge should use identical, predefined marking forms that meticulously break down points. This reduces the risks of “gut feeling scoring”.
• Audit Trail: After the event, save all score sheets (physical or electronic) and make them available for review, at least to participants and parents upon request.
• Independent Tallying: Task at least two non-judging volunteers with independently checking score additions. More than once, a simple maths error has wrongly tilted a result—by fixing this, we avoided drama.
• Announce Final Scores or Justifications: Publish the final ranking with scores for each section, or, if privacy is a concern, provide each participant with their individual scores and brief comments on their strengths and areas for improvement.
• Cater for Appeals: Have a clear, time-limited appeal process wherein participants can challenge their marks for genuine errors, not simply outcomes they dislike. Ensure appeals are handled by a fresh panel or overseen by a chief judge.

For one regional event, I personally scanned and emailed anonymised judge reports to parents within a week of the competition. The effect on trust was immediate—even disappointed families said they “appreciated the transparency”, and several skilled students returned the following year rather than leaving disillusioned.

Open Communication: Before, During, and After

Transparency isn’t a checklist; it’s a climate of open, honest communication. All the rules and forms in the world mean nothing if organisers are tight-lipped or defensive when questions arise. Fostering an environment where everyone feels safe to ask, query, and receive sincere answers is non-negotiable.

• Pre-Event Orientations: Offer a public Q&A session (in person or virtual) a fortnight before the contest. Let judges, teachers, parents, and even students ask the “awkward” questions—before tensions rise.
• Clear On-the-Day Announcements: Keep all participants updated on timings, running order, and any delays. Miscommunication leads to anxiety and sometimes allegations of unfairness, especially if participants feel they were rushed or left waiting.
• Post-Event Feedback: Allow families to submit feedback—anonymous or signed—regarding both process and outcome. Take criticism seriously and share a summary of received feedback and actions considered or taken.

In my own experience, the best-run competitions are those where organisers and judges freely acknowledge that they are not infallible. If an error is made, admit it, correct it where possible, and be open about what steps are being taken to prevent similar issues in future. That honesty goes far toward fostering respect and trust.

Leveraging Technology for Added Fairness

Many local competitions still operate with minimal technology, but even modest digital upgrades can help transparency significantly—when used with care.

• Digital Registration & Randomised Scheduling: Use simple apps or online platforms to automate draw orders and scheduling, reducing any suspicion of tactical slotting.
• Live Scoring: Consider displaying anonymised, live-updated scores for the audience to see. This engages attendees and shows the fairness in real time.
• Automated Audit Logs: Digital forms with time-stamped entries prevent tampering after the event and make auditing easier if a result is questioned.
• Feedback Forms: Use online feedback to make participation easier for all segments, especially younger contestants and busy parents.

However, while technology can help, it’s no substitute for sincere, principled leadership. Tools are only as good as those who wield them.

A Culture of Continuous Improvement

Finally, transparency is a journey, not a checkbox. Every year, every competition, I learn something new from a complaint, a suggestion, or a crisis averted. The ultimate aim is to create a space where the love of the Quran, not the stress of “competition politics”, is what lingers in every participant’s heart.

• Solicit Honest Reviews: Proactively ask teachers, students, and parents for input—what worked, what didn’t, what “felt off”—and tackle issues honestly.
• Document Changes: Keep a running log of lessons learned and openly share which aspects have changed based on prior feedback. This Model of Transparency strengthens community trust, year after year.

With each transparent step, we not only do justice to our young huffaz and qurra, but we fulfil a trust—amana—upon us as caretakers and lovers of the Quran. May Allah grant us sincerity and rectify our intentions and actions.

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