> Ms Schaede suggests that quota men may simply have been better at the job than marginal women. Male and female teachers differ. Men were more likely to speak Finnish as their mother tongue and to have studied mathematics. Perhaps these or other characteristics helped their teaching.

> In other words, the selection criteria for teachers may have elevated candidates who were less suitable—exactly the outcome critics of quotas fear.

I don't understand this second paragraph. If men are better at the job and the quota elevated men, how can you conclude that "the selection criteria for teachers may have elevated candidates who were less suitable"?