Education

“Who is a good member of society, who is a good person?”, the Chancellor of Justice asked in autumn 2023 at the educational conference “Igaüks meist loeb” (Every one of us counts) organised at the Rocca al Mare School. Children and young people are supported in growing up into independent individuals by their family, teachers, kindergarten, school, as well as rural municipalities and cities, the state and society as a whole. Every child is invaluable, it is the duty of us all to help them grow into a good person, to create Estonia’s future (see the interview with the Chancellor of Justice published in the Sirp newspaper).

A parent is entitled to choose a school for their child within the existing education system. At the same time, neither children nor parents have the right to demand abstention from reorganisation which is necessary in the public and community interests and is not excessively burdensome for individuals. Regardless of their place of residence, parents and home language, all children are entitled to education in line with their abilities, said the Chancellor of Justice at the education network development conference “HaridusLood” in November 2023. Schools should not be divided into good or bad. All schools should support the desire to learn and develop into a good person. After all, school also means preparing for adult life: for adaptation and effort, for a calm and cordial understanding of what is different from oneself, for being a dignified citizen.

The task of the state and of cities and rural municipalities is to organise school life in a rational way. A city or rural municipality which feels that these tasks are beyond its capacity has the right and duty to take the state to court. Children and young people have the right to education. A local authority may not leave the functions assigned to it by law to the families. 

In order to obtain a place at a kindergarten for their child, parents often have to seek help from the court. The reason is that several cities and rural municipalities have failed to create enough kindergarten places. Violation of the rights of parents and children is such an acute problem that judges have also addressed it in their podcast Kohtulood (see “Mida peab teadma lasteaiakoha taotlemisest või koolitranspordist?” (What do you need to know about applying for a place in kindergarten or about school transport?)). Judges from the Tallinn Administrative Court discussed this issue with a Chancellor’s Adviser on the podcast. 

One of the biggest goals in education in the coming years is the transition to instruction in Estonian. The unity of a co-operative society also depends on how people understand each other. In Estonia, the basis for this unity is the Estonian language, which is best learned in kindergarten and school.

Preschool education

A rural municipality or city government must provide a place in kindergarten to all children between the ages of one and a half to seven years whose parents apply for it. Recognition is due to those cities and rural municipalities who are able to ensure kindergarten places for all children by establishing new kindergartens, opening additional groups, involving private kindergartens or cooperating with a neighbouring city or rural municipality.

Several rural municipalities and cities support parents in paying the place fee for a private kindergarten. When offering such voluntary support, a rural municipality or city may decide on the conditions under which this is done. The Chancellor of Justice found that a rural municipality may establish a procedure according to which the parents of a child attending a private kindergarten or childcare are not supported if, by 1 October of the current school year, the child has turned at least three years old and the family has waived a place offered in a municipal kindergarten. So, if a child should go to another kindergarten, they will have to get used to the new environment, which may take some time. However, this need not always be detrimental to the child’s well-being. In the specific case, the rural municipal council gave the rural municipality government the opportunity to consider whether paying support could exceptionally be justified.

If a child’s home municipality or city has fulfilled its task, but the parent has chosen for their child a kindergarten maintained by another rural municipality or city, the child’s home municipality or city must, according to the law, contribute to the costs of that kindergarten place. Covering the costs of a kindergarten in another city or rural municipality is essentially performance of a state function, the costs of which must be covered from the state budget (see the Chancellor’s opinion on “Termination of payment of support for a private kindergarten”). As currently no legal norm stipulates that the costs directly related to performing such a state function should be covered from the state budget, a local authority can demand that expenses incurred be covered by the Ministry of Education and Research. If the ministry refuses to do so, the rural municipality or city may have recourse to the administrative court with a claim for expenses incurred. 

Cities and rural municipalities may not impose additional restrictions on obtaining a place in kindergarten. According to the Supreme Court, it is unconstitutional for a rural municipality or city to make grant of a kindergarten place conditional on the availability of vacancies. The court reasoned that, as a result, children enjoying a statutory right to a place in kindergarten may be left without one. The Chancellor of Justice found that a local authority should repeal such restrictions. Cities and rural municipalities should also repeal illusory restrictions that could mislead a parent and leave the impression that a kindergarten place may be denied or postponed. The Chancellor recommended that the Ministry of Education and Research should look for additional ways to help local authorities in predicting the need for kindergarten places and ensuring places.

A family does not necessarily have to obtain a place for their child in the kindergarten that the parent considers most suitable or that is located closest to home. The city and rural municipality government has fulfilled its obligation when it gives the family a place in a kindergarten within the service district. However, the courts have found that the obligation of a rural municipality and a city cannot be considered fulfilled if the family is offered a place in a kindergarten that is not accessible to it, i.e. it is located at an unreasonable distance from where the family actually lives, so that the family would have to incur significant expenses in order to take the child to the kindergarten (see Tallinn Circuit Court of Appeal judgment in case No 3-21-336). If, in the opinion of the parent, a kindergarten place is not accessible, the parent may notify the local authority thereof and apply for a new kindergarten place. If the local authority does not resolve the problem, the parent may have recourse to the court to protect their own rights and those of the child.

A local authority is responsible for the proper maintenance of a kindergarten. For example, a rural municipality or city government decides on the opening hours of a kindergarten, based on a proposal by the board of trustees. The rural municipality or city government must take into account the interests of children and families and consider the proposal by the board of trustees on the merits (see the opinion on “Changing the opening hours of a kindergarten”). The opinion of the board of trustees helps the local authority better understand what happens in kindergarten on a daily basis. At the same time, the rural municipality or city government does not have to agree with a proposal by the board of trustees. A parent who does not like such an arrangement can have recourse to the court. 

According to the law, a child is entitled to receive assistance in kindergarten from a speech therapist, a special educator or other support service provider. A child’s development is monitored and evaluated by kindergarten teachers. A child’s need for speech therapy is assessed by a speech therapist. Unlike a speech therapist, teachers (including special educators) lack preparation for provision of speech therapy. On the recommendation of the Chancellor of Justice, a rural municipality organised speech therapy assessment and speech therapy for children. 

A child is entitled to speech therapy in kindergarten free of charge. The owner of the kindergarten cannot refuse to provide a child the assistance of a speech therapist because there is no speech therapist in the kindergarten. A local authority that fails to fulfil its task, i.e. arrange assistance of a speech therapist, must reimburse the parent for expenses incurred for an appointment with a speech therapist. Sometimes local authorities are unable to observe these principles. For example, in one case, the rural municipality began to provide speech therapy to children in kindergarten only after the intervention of the Chancellor of Justice. At the same time, the parent was reimbursed for the costs of a speech therapist’s appointment which the parent had to incur because the children could not go to a speech therapist’s appointment in kindergarten.

If Rajaleidja counsellors have determined that a child needs an adjustment group and if the parent has submitted a relevant application, the owner of the kindergarten must create this possibility. A recommendation by Rajaleidja cannot be ignored or interpreted as meaning that implementing the recommendation is voluntary. Nor is the owner of a kindergarten relieved of the duty to create an adjustment group by the justification that it is difficult to do so. The Chancellor recommended that the child be given the opportunity to attend a kindergarten adjustment group. 

General education

A child is entitled to attend a school close to their place of residence. This school is assigned to a child by the city or rural municipality government, taking into account, first of all, the proximity of the child’s residence to the school and whether other children of the same family are studying at a particular school. If possible, parents’ other wishes are also taken into account. When assigning a school to a child, a local authority is also allowed to take into account other circumstances if more children are eligible than there are places in a particular school (Supreme Court judgment in case No 3-4-1-16-16, para. 21). 

For a parent who finds that the rural municipality or city government has violated a child’s rights when assigning a school according to the child’s residence, it is most expedient to protect the rights of the child through the court. The court can assess whether the rural municipality government has lawfully assigned the school according to the child’s residence, and can also oblige the rural municipality government to make a new decision (Tallinn Circuit Court of Appeal judgment in case No 3-20926, paras 21 and 24). All the important circumstances must be taken into account in aggregate.

The Chancellor of Justice has received a number of petitions from parents who are dissatisfied with the way their home municipality has arranged for their child’s attending school. Although rural municipalities and cities have broad possibilities to decide how to organise school transport, they must first and foremost take into account the interests of the child, and school transport must also be accessible to the child. 

A local authority cannot leave the organisation of school transport to families. If it is found that for some reason a child cannot use the school bus, the municipality must find another solution so that the child arrives at school on time and safely (see the Chancellor’s opinion on “Organising school transport”). The school route must be safe and manageable for the child, and the waiting time for the bus after the school day must be of reasonable length. A local authority can establish the conditions for organising a school route, based on which it can assess how the school transport arrangements suit a particular pupil. 

The school educates and nurtures at the same time. The learning environment must be age-appropriate, safe and developing for pupils. A pupil must be supported if everything does not go smoothly for them at school, which can only be done through mutually understanding cooperation between the family and the school. A parent’s concern for the child is understandable, but the school nevertheless does not have to agree with all the parent’s proposals. In the event of a loss of trust between the school and the parent, the parties may ask for help from the Social Insurance Board or Rajaleidja. In such a situation, the Social Insurance Board will be able to implement a restorative justice programme.

If a pupil violates the school internal rules, the school has the right and obligation to find out all the circumstances of the incident, but such action must not be perceived as a punishment or degrade the dignity of the pupil. In order to ascertain a pupil’s point of view, the school could speak with them in an age-appropriate manner, rather than request a written explanation (see the opinion on “Taking explanations from a pupil”). However, the law does not prohibit asking for a written explanation. 

Sanctions may be used in respect of a pupil in order to ensure compliance with the school internal rules and to create a mutually respectful and safe learning environment. A written reprimand to a pupil must be in accordance with the law in both substance and form (see the opinion on “The lawfulness of a reprimand”). 

When planning decisions affect a child, it is necessary to ascertain the child’s best interests and rely on them as a primary consideration when making a decision (see the opinion on “Temporary prohibition on participation in studies”). A more effective measure than prohibition from participating in studies may be to offer the pupil the help of a support specialist and a behavioural support plan is drawn up for them. The pupil’s behaviour can also be discussed with their parent and, in a situation of conflict, the parties can be reconciled so that an agreement can be reached on how to proceed.

Excluding a pupil from school cannot be decided lightly by the school. Before making a decision on exclusion, the pupil must first be offered support. If, despite implementing appropriate support measures and sanctions, an upper secondary school pupil continues to violate the school internal rules, they must be expelled from school according to the law. Since exclusion from school restricts the fundamental right to education and can have a significant impact on a young person’s future life, the reason for exclusion from school cannot be just any repeat violation of the internal rules (e.g. being late for class, lack of indoor footwear, and the like), but only violations which can be said to amount to compelling reasons for restricting access to education, and exclusion must be justified in the specific case. The decision to exclude a pupil from upper secondary school must be in writing and must also state the reasons. The decision must also indicate the possibilities for challenging the decision (see the opinion on “Exclusion of a pupil from school”).

A teacher’s intervention in pupils’ interaction with each other is justified when someone is being insulted, someone is being excessively loud or discomfort in others is caused because they cannot understand the talk of their peers due to a foreign language. However, in their free time, pupils are entitled to communicate in the language of their choice (see the opinion on “Language of communication between pupils“). Everyone has the right to maintain their ethnic affiliation, and the mother tongue is part of a person’s national identity. Everyone is also entitled to free linguistic self-realisation and inviolability of private life. 

The daily schedule at school must also provide sufficient time for rest and eating (see the opinion on “The organisation of studies”). Pupils should not become tired at school, the load must be distributed evenly. Each lesson must be followed by a break of at least ten minutes. Pupils must have at least 15 minutes for eating. Although in some cases the school has found that pupils and teachers could agree on the length of the break among themselves, such an agreement does not replace the school’s daily schedule or what is established in the school internal rules.

A school may not require an upper secondary school pupil to present an authorisation for leaving the school building during lessons or a break. Therefore, while resolving a complaint the Chancellor found that the requirement to present an authorisation justifying leaving the school restricts freedom of movement, whereas the freedom of movement of upper secondary school pupils may not be restricted. However, for security and supervision purposes, basic school pupils leaving the school building and school grounds may be restricted. Nevertheless, a school may, if necessary, check the entry and exit of pupils (including upper secondary school pupils) to and from the school building, for example by asking them to present a pupil’s card.

The law states that a school may not prohibit absence if a pupil wishes to go on a trip, participate in competitions or sports camps, or the like, during studies. However, the school always has the right to assess whether a pupil’s absence is justified or not. A pupil has the right and duty to study, so that they may be absent from school only for a compelling reason. According to the law, it is enough for a parent to inform the school about a pupil’s absence and the reason for it on the first day of absence. Thus, in order for a pupil to be absent, a parent does not have to apply for permission from the school in advance (see the opinion on “Notification of absence from studies”). If a child is absent from studies at the decision of the parent, but in the opinion of the school the parent has not behaved correctly, the school can discuss the situation with the pupil and the parent, for example, during a development conversation.

Every child must be able to acquire education in the best possible way in line with their abilities, and teachers must create a good atmosphere for learning. This also means that a pupil must be supported in their studies primarily by the school, a responsibility that cannot be left to the parents. A pupil can receive assistance, for example from a school psychologist or other support specialist. A teacher must have basic skills for teaching pupils with special educational needs (see the Chancellor’s opinion). The head of the school is responsible for ensuring that a teacher working at the school has the relevant skills. In addition, the school must ensure that, if necessary, a special educator is also available, who, among other things, instructs the teacher in teaching children with special educational needs.

If necessary, the school must offer a pupil individual supervision, the help of a support specialist, as well as study assistance lessons by group. If Rajaleidja recommends referring a child to home schooling or individual study for health reasons, the school must take this recommendation into account. 

A recommendation by Rajaleidja is mandatory for the school if the parent has also given written consent to it. While resolving a petition, the Chancellor found that a school had violated a child’s rights by not allowing the child to study in a special class with up to 12 pupils in the 2023/2024 academic year, as had been recommended by Rajaleidja. It is unacceptable to allow a situation to arise in which a child cannot learn to the best of their abilities and is not provided with the necessary support at school. In this particular case, the school agreed to organise studies for the child beginning from the new academic year in line with the recommendation of Rajaleidja, but this does not reverse damage that may have been caused by not providing the child with appropriate support in the previous academic year.

Sometimes a child needs to be transferred to a class with a smaller number of pupils. Before implementing such a support measure, the school must listen to the pupil and justify to them why they are being transferred to the new class (see the opinion on “Transfer to another class”). If the child runs into difficulties in adapting to the new class, once the school has learned about this, it must find out the causes of the problem. To facilitate a child’s studies, all possible measures should be considered. Before a decision is made, the pupil and their parent are also heard. 

A rural municipality and city, as school owners and providers of social services for residents of the municipality, can organise the necessary assistance for a child through either the social or educational system, or both. While resolving a complaint, the Chancellor found a rural municipality had not acted correctly when deciding to leave a child without a support person. The issue was that the rural municipality government had provided a support person for the child during the previous two and a half years, and the child’s need for assistance had not changed during the current academic year. Although the rural municipality government had taken the position that, in the future, the school but not the rural municipality social welfare department should provide assistance to the child, the municipality should have continued providing assistance until the school was ready to take over this task completely. 

A child’s development and coping at school is monitored by teachers, based on whose assessment teaching can be adjusted in line with the child’s individual needs and abilities. For example, it is possible to implement instructed studies organised by a school, during which a teacher directly supports the pupil. The knowledge and skills check must measure the level of skills and knowledge established by the curriculum and provide feedback to the pupil in a graded form. Based on the grade, it can also be decided whether the pupil might need support in studies. Also, a grade, including a grade for a test retake, can affect the aggregate grade, as well as the child’s further education. 

After an extended absence, a child may need more support in learning. Absence may lead to lagging behind in studies, but absence from class cannot lead to the conclusion that the pupil’s knowledge and skills are insufficient. The Chancellor found that it was not correct to assess a child’s knowledge with a grade of "1" simply for being absent from class. What is assessed are a pupil’s knowledge and skills, not absence from class. A grade of "1" means that in a particular subject the pupil’s knowledge is insufficient. 

A pupil is entitled to retake a test that could not be taken before or for which a negative grade was received. If a pupil does not go and retake the test, the teacher may give them a negative grade since the pupil has not been given an opportunity to assess their knowledge and skills. However, when setting the deadline for retaking a test, the school must also take into account, for example, that if a pupil has been absent for a long time, they need to retake tests in several subjects simultaneously. This can be overwhelming for the pupil, as during a short period they will have to retake all the tests that had not been taken due to absence and, at the same time, learn new material with others. The aim is for the pupil to master the material as best as possible and not lag behind others in their knowledge and skills.

A pupil’s knowledge is assessed according to the grading scale, which, according to the national curriculum, is the basis for evaluating both the original tests and retakes. It must be objectively clear at what level the pupil’s knowledge and skills meet the requirements of the curriculum. Therefore, no reason exists to lower the grade of a pupil who has retaken a test (see the Chancellor’s opinion). Nor can it be considered correct if a pupil’s grade for a retaken test is raised without justification. Such a consideration is a teacher’s subjective decision, though objective feedback on the pupil’s knowledge and skills might not be offered in this way. A teacher may use a grading scale different from the national curriculum only if the test is simpler or more complicated than the grading scale established in the curriculum. A retake test measures the same learning outcomes as are measured by the original test. 

The Chancellor has repeatedly been asked how many tests a week can be arranged for one class. Up to three tests may be carried out in one study week, and a test is defined as written work verifying acquisition of the learning outcomes of an academic quarter or of a course. If it is possible to make a note about the planned test in the school’s online environment, then teachers must make this note, as failing to make a note can cause unnecessary tension. The more clearly tests are planned, the easier it is for the school to assess pupils’ study load. Teachers must organise studies so as to support pupils in their learning. 

Transition to instruction in Estonian

The transition of Russian-language schools to instruction in Estonian has made parents worry that too many non-Estonian-speaking children may start studying in classes at the same time. Parents of both Estonian and non-Estonian speaking children, whose children have so far studied in Russian, are concerned. 

The Chancellor has said that if a Russian-speaking child needs additional support when studying in Estonian, this does not mean that a pupil whose mother tongue is Estonian can be left uninstructed and unsupported. 

For non-Estonian-speaking students, learning in Estonian can be difficult at times. The success of instructed and supported learning depends on the knowledge, skills and attitudes of school staff. It is important that the school environment as a whole should support instruction in Estonian, encourage young people to learn Estonian and show interest in Estonian culture, history and current events. When living in Estonia, one needs to know Estonian.

Transition to instruction in Estonian is compatible with the Constitution. The Constitution does not enshrine the right to request that the state should provide basic education in another language (see Supreme Court order in case No 3-23-2480; the Chancellor’s opinion to the Supreme Court on “The language of instruction in public school”). According to the Constitution, the official language of Estonia is Estonian and children are entitled to free basic education in Estonian. Nor does it follow from international law binding on Estonia that a child or a young person should be guaranteed free basic education in their mother tongue which is not the official language.

Children and young people with disabilities who do not speak Estonian are entitled to receive education that supports their ability to cope in the Estonian-speaking environment and participate in society equally with others. Thus, the transition to instruction in Estonian is also in the interests of children and young people with disabilities (see the Chancellor’s opinion on “Transition to instruction in Estonian”). 

When organising studies, the abilities of pupils in need of support must be taken into account. If properly supported, the vast majority of children with special educational needs are able to learn in a language other than their mother tongue. It is necessary to use a teaching methodology appropriate to the child’s development, as well as make greater adjustments in teaching and learning. The law has also taken into account the interests of children and young people who, due to their disability, are unable to learn in Estonian.

Organisation of the online test examination and final examinations 

In April, an online test examination in Estonian was organised for basic school leavers. During the examination, pupils were given the opportunity to use the combined dictionary of the Estonian Language Institute’s language portal Sõnaveeb as a reference material, but not the dictionary of standard Estonian, Õigekeelsussõnaraamat. 

In her letter to the Education and Youth Board, the Chancellor recalled that the basis for standard written language is the latest dictionary of standard Estonian. Written work in the Estonian language as a subject in the syllabus must follow the orthographic rules, and the teacher must evaluate a pupil’s work on the basis of the norms for standard written Estonian. 

The Chancellor found that if reference material is to be made available to pupils during the basic school final examination in Estonian, it must be the latest dictionary of standard Estonian, Õigekeelsussõnaraamat (ÕS) or its online version. Reference material at an examination must be unequivocally clear for a pupil. 

According to the Ministry of Education and Research, the standing recommendation is to provide pupils access only to the dictionary of standard Estonian during the online examination.

An examination may be undertaken in writing on paper or electronically in the test database, or orally. This is decided by the Minister of Education and Research for each subject for the following academic year by 25 May at the latest. If the minister establishes an electronic form for the written part of the exams in these subjects, then basic school graduates must be able to prepare for the electronic examination.

Basic education must give a pupil the opportunity for self-realisation according to their abilities. Computer literacy has become increasingly essential over time, which must be taken into account by schools when organising studies. The task of the school is to offer all pupils the opportunity to learn how to use a computer well, so that they can also perform learning tasks on a computer. The ability to use a computer is one of the general competences whose acquisition must be supported in order for a pupil to be able, among other things, to make learning more efficient.

The Chancellor of Justice found that although pupils who have completed an informatics curriculum may have better computer skills, in abstract terms this does not give any advantage to an examinee. It is important that all pupils should be able to familiarise themselves with both the structure and form of an examination before the examination itself. The structure and form of an examination must not come as a surprise to a pupil during the examination.

Equal conditions for graduation, including the same exceptions, must be established for pupils with the same level of education. Different conditions may be established for graduating from basic school than apply to graduation from upper secondary school (see the opinion on “Basic school graduation conditions“). In graduating from upper secondary school, it is possible to replace the state examination in a foreign language with an internationally recognised examination, but no such opportunity is laid down in graduating from basic school. 

Since, in graduating from upper secondary school, it has been considered possible to replace a foreign language examination with an internationally recognised examination, it may be considered appropriate to introduce a similar possibility for basic school graduates. The Chancellor also forwarded this position to the Ministry of Education and Research, which prepares draft legislation concerning the organisation of general education.

Vocational education

Determining the timing of apprenticeship

Each pupil must participate in studies, so that they must know during which period their studies and apprenticeship take place and when they are entitled to take a break from studies, i.e. when the school holiday occurs. A pupil is entitled to rest according to the plan approved by the school. Absence of such a plan would mean that a pupil must constantly be ready to participate in studies. 

The Chancellor found that since the school was late in informing pupils about apprenticeship and failed to establish a holiday period, the school failed to take into account that pupils are entitled to a break from studies. As a result, a pupil in a vocational school had to undergo an apprenticeship during a period for which the school had planned no studies. 

Of course, it is not excluded that the school will have to change the study schedule during the academic year, but these changes must be justified and sufficiently foreseeable. 

Re-issue of a pupil’s card

The Minister of Education and Research agreed with the Chancellor of Justice and, on 8 January 2023, annulled a regulatory provision according to which a vocational educational institution could request a pupil to reimburse expenses arising from re-issue of a pupil’s card if the card has been damaged, destroyed, lost or stolen. 

According to the law, the minister must establish the procedure for issuing a pupil’s card, but the law does not regulate charging a fee for it. Nor does the law give the Minister of Education and Research the power to regulate it. 

A pupil studying in a vocational school is entitled to receive a pupil’s card so that they can prove their pupil status. The regulation must be enacted on the basis of a law. 

Exclusion from a vocational educational institution

Until 6 May 2024, the law did not regulate the conditions for excluding a pupil from a vocational educational institution. Under the regulation of the Minister of Education and Research, a first-year pupil in a vocational educational institution had to be excluded from school if the pupil had not started studying within two weeks of the beginning of studies without a compelling reason. The Chancellor was asked to assess whether this regulatory condition complied with the law.

The Chancellor concluded that the law did not provide for the condition of exclusion from school as laid down by the regulation. The Minister of Education and Research agreed that the regulation must be based on the law.

The Riigikogu laid down the same condition for exclusion in § 34¹ (1) clause 3 of the Vocational Educational Institutions Act.

Higher education

Participation in studies during academic leave

If a student wishes to study during academic leave, stating disability as the reason, they must also prove this. A student who contacted the Chancellor of Justice found that the university was asking them too much information to prove disability. 

Proof of disability is a disabled person’s card issued by the Social Insurance Board, which states the severity, type and duration of disability. The Chancellor explained to the student that, in granting the right to participate in studies, a university may only verify the circumstances prescribed in the university’s rules for the organisation of studies. At the same time, the university cannot decide what data, for example, will be entered on a disabled person’s card. The university may use personal data that has become known to it to the extent allowed by the application submitted by the student.

Applying for scholarship

It is contrary to good administrative practice if the online setting for applying does not actually enable the application to be submitted. For example, it was found that students were entitled to apply for scholarship in September, but the technical solution of the Tartu University study information system was not yet complete by that time. The university did not offer any other solutions to apply for the scholarship in September. 

The Chancellor found that by depriving students of the opportunity to submit scholarship applications in a timely manner and by providing misleading information about submitting applications on its website, the university violated the principle of good administration and the rights of students.

By regulation, the Minister of Education and Research has granted an educational institution and the Education and Youth Board the right to establish the exact time and method of submitting applications for a speciality scholarship and a scholarship supporting acquisition of higher education. The Riigikogu has not empowered the minister to do so. The Chancellor made a proposal to the Ministry of Education and Research to bring the regulation into line with the law.

University admission conditions

A university must establish and make public the conditions for admission, including the minimum language proficiency requirements concerning the language of instruction. According to those conditions, the University of Tartu required a candidate to have an Estonian language proficiency certificate on level C1, or passing the C1 level examination in Estonian at the University of Tartu, even though the candidate had acquired education in Estonian.

Universities enjoy a broad right of self-organisation and, among other things, the right to establish admission conditions, but this right is not unlimited.

In the Chancellor’s opinion, the condition imposed by the university contravened the Language Act. A person who has acquired basic education, secondary education or higher education in Estonian does not have to prove their Estonian language skills with a proficiency examination. 

The university took the Chancellor’s recommendation into account and, in 2024, no longer requires candidates to prove their Estonian language proficiency if the candidate has acquired basic education, secondary education or higher education in Estonian.