Harno language chief's defence of exam marking exposes her own competence gap

Postimees journalist Pekka Erelt argues that Harno language department head Nele Toime has inadvertently revealed her own lack of competence by dismissing criticism of Estonia's national exam marking system. In 2024, 94 appeals were filed against exam scores, with 57 resulting in raised marks. Erelt contends that years of denying systemic flaws cannot be sustained in the face of documented marking errors.

Nele Toime, head of the language department at Harno — Estonia's education and youth board — recently published an opinion piece insisting that the national exam marking system is not flawed and that criticism of it relies on isolated experiences or mere speculation. According to Postimees journalist Pekka Erelt, this defence has been heard for years and holds no more water today than it did before.

Erelt points out that the numbers tell a different story. In 2024 alone, 94 formal appeals were submitted against state exam marking decisions. In 57 of those cases — more than half — the student's score was subsequently raised. For a system its own administrators describe as sound, that is a striking rate of correction.

Criticism brushed aside for years

The journalist notes that Toime's dismissal of concerns is not new. Mother-tongue teachers have long raised objections to how written exams are assessed, yet their professional testimony has been consistently waved away as anecdotal. Documented marking errors, when they surface, are treated as exceptions rather than indicators of a broader pattern.

Erelt argues that by writing a public defence of the status quo while ignoring this evidence, Toime has done the opposite of what she intended: rather than reassuring the public, she has highlighted a worrying unwillingness at the institutional level to engage seriously with legitimate critique. In his view, this amounts to a public demonstration of the very incompetence critics have been pointing to.

Systemic accountability needed

The broader question, Erelt suggests, is whether an education authority can maintain credibility when it responds to evidence-based criticism with blanket reassurances. With more than half of all 2024 exam appeals ending in the student's favour, he argues there is ample reason for Harno to undertake a genuine review of its marking procedures rather than dismissing those who call for one.