What Are Your Thoughts on The Amount of Emphasis Placed on Tutoring in Primary and Secondary Education?

NotReallyaMoneySaver on 03/02/2026 - 12:49
Last edited 03/02/2026 - 13:27 by 1 other user

Australia Private Tutoring Market Size & Outlook, 2025-2033 By 2033, the private tutoring market size is set to increase to 1.5 billion USD.

It feels like in the past 5-10 years, tutoring has become far more common than it has many years prior. It's practically viewed as necessary for children and teens to go to tutoring just so they can go to their preferred school and then even more tutoring for subjects.When they graduate, they start their own tutoring companies.

It's almost viewed like that if you don't do tutoring, you're bound to fail and fall behind everyone else who is also doing tutoring.

Where did the increased emphasis come from? What are your thoughts on it? Will you be investing in "tutoring" for your children?

Education & Work Tutoring

Comments

Best
Search through all the comments in this post.
  • Jimothy Wongingtons on 03/02/2026 - 13:06
    +21

    My parents spent a lot of money on tutoring and I still turned out as a failure academically - I hated it though - should have picked up a trade in grade 10. I’ll be giving my kids the choice but won’t force. If they want to and can apply themselves sure. Otherwise I’m not opposed to them getting a trade. Could be worse either way, at least we are not Singapore/ Malaysia/ Japan/ China etc

    • Muppet Detector on 03/02/2026 - 19:37
      +4

      My parents spent a lot of money on tutoring and I still turned out as a failure academically

      You know what Jimothy?

      From what I've seen of you in this forum, somebody in your life (including yourself), has done a really good job. Maybe academics wasn't your thing, but definitely not a failure at life and just being a really awesome bloke.

      Otherwise I’m not opposed to them getting a trade

      It's ok to be great at academic stuff and do a trade.

      An advantage for me for at least completing year twelve (I did initially pursue a trade), was that when I wanted to go to uni as a mature aged student, I could get right into it without needing any bridging courses etc.

    • NotReallyaMoneySaver on 03/02/2026 - 13:09

      Nowadays, tutoring is often viewed as the only solution to succeed in high school. It often doesn't take in the child's views.

      • jv on 03/02/2026 - 14:21
        +19

        tutoring is often viewed as the only solution to succeed in high school.

        Absolute rubbish…

        The parents, school & teachers and the kids's friendship group are the most important factors.

        If the foundations are not in place, tutoring does nothing…

        If the foundations are in place, tutoring 'may' help a bit, but certainly not necessary…

        • Muppet Detector on 03/02/2026 - 19:07
          +2

          If the foundations are not in place, tutoring does nothing…

          Pretty much this.

          At least by grade nine. After that, remedial tutoring is only useful for short term spot checking. The only beneficial tutoring from about grade eight or nine is for kids engaged in independent learning who may need a hand from time to time grasping or mastering a new topic

        • Jimothy Wongingtons on 03/02/2026 - 14:43

          So the real success was the friends we made along the way?

      • p1 ama on 03/02/2026 - 16:16
        +1

        only solution to succeed

        Define "succeed"?

        • sangohan on 10/02/2026 - 17:45

          get the highest grade possible, become doctor/lawyer/white collar profession and get rich with "easy" career.

          • Muppet Detector on 10/02/2026 - 19:03

            @sangohan: Are they still a success if pursuing those careers make you miserable?

            For me, "the highest grade possible" just equates to having more options at one point in time to choose which career they do want to pursue rather than a lower grade potentially limiting whatever choices they have.

            High grades do provide opportunity for intraschool mobility, subject and grade advancement though, so are certainly useful in those settings.

            IMO, More important long term is what you are learning and how well you are learning it (strong foundations to support future learning) including what is referred to as soft skills, not how well you perform on a test.

            These days, (for Australia at least), your high school grades are just one way to gain admission into a tertiary or white collar career. Many kids begin uni before they've even graduated from high school after which merely graduating (from high school) sometime before the completion of your uni undergrad degree is the only requirement.

  • altomic on 03/02/2026 - 14:00
    +15

    “If you don’t get a tutor for your child then they will fail school.”

    As a parent of 3 (2 at uni & 1 in year 12) , it’s about the home environment .

    I “Normalised” study by doing post grad when my kids were younger .

    “Look kids , reading, writing and learning is normal”.

    Also learning what your children are learning so you can keep up, understand and assist them with their work.

    “But that’s the teachers job” so many parents mutter.

    It’s the parents job to help their kids.

    My kids occasionally ask me for help with their school work.

    When I am stumped then I ask them to explain it to me like they were explaining it to my elderly mother.

    Makes them think about it, and gives me an insight.

    “But I don’t have time to help my kids with school work” some parents mutter.

    Do better parents

    • jv on 03/02/2026 - 14:24
      +7

      Do better parents

      This…

    • buyer-123 on 04/02/2026 - 14:25
      +2

      Explaining a concept to others is the best way to learn it for yourself!

  • Bruceflix on 03/02/2026 - 12:52
    +9

    ATAR cutoff to become a teacher in SA is 60. That in itself is why I get tutoring for my children.

    • Benoffie on 03/02/2026 - 17:56
      +5

      Remember ATAR is reflective of market demand, not student capacity.

    • Clear on 03/02/2026 - 13:08
      +1

      Not to mention many universities will do whatever they can to make sure those studying education pass.

      • 87percent on 03/02/2026 - 19:27

        Not just education.

    • jv on 03/02/2026 - 14:20
      +1

      You're probably sending them to the wrong school then…

    • Muppet Detector on 03/02/2026 - 18:08

      Brigette enrolled in BEd (primary). Not sure if she graduated though.

  • wallet72 on 03/02/2026 - 13:19
    +8

    tutoring to help specific issues or parts of a subject is ok, tutoring to 'get ahead' and 'be the smartest' seems like just another reason kids get burned out and don't have any real social like experience.
    I guess if you think school without tutoring as a waste of time then homeschool them and push them through more tutoring.

  • DingoBilly on 03/02/2026 - 13:54
    +7

    Seems like a SEA cultural idea coming through? I know they really focus heavily on tutoring. It seems pretty toxic though and from what I've seen is often done badly leading to other issues (focusing on memorisation instead of problem solving).

    I personally haven't found the benefit beyond specific remediation needs. Plenty of dumb kids who didn't achieve much through regular tutoring, and plenty of gifted kids who excelled without tutoring.

    I think let kids be kids and enjoy their time off except in very specific short term scenarios. For example, to help where a kid had time off due to illness or for a specific concept they just didn't grasp and need a month of extra help with.

    • NotReallyaMoneySaver on 03/02/2026 - 13:58

      I wholeheartedly agree! However that isn't the case right now. Tutoring is often treated as supplementary rather than complementary.

      • DingoBilly on 03/02/2026 - 14:02

        Ultimately you're the parent and need to do what you believe is best for your kid.

        Don't let what others are doing change that as others often get it wrong. But also be open to the idea that you're not going to get it all right either and will stuff up as a parent.

    • bargaino on 03/02/2026 - 23:17

      Seems like a SEA cultural idea coming through?

      More NEA or South Asia.
      Its a bit crazy in China, S Korea, Japan, India. The only SEA nation with high tutoring rates is Singapore.

      India makes some sense. Their education system is poor, but tuition often makes the same mistakes of mindless rote learning.

  • Benoffie on 03/02/2026 - 17:37
    +6

    I teach and I have paid for a tutor. However, I dont agree with them.

    Large portions of tutoring is neither remedial nor extension. It's merely playing catch up on assignments and classwork. If this is your child, you have bigger issues and tutoring is a bandaid (had this discussion in my own extended family)

    If tutoring is 'extension' (and I use that term loosely as a ridiculous number of parents think their child is gifted and they are not), then a) what discussion have you had with the school b) is that the best school for them and c) are they being extended in even the right things?

    I have sooo many parents tell me at interviews that I need to extend their child, their child is 'special' and that they are being tutored due to some abject failure of the public system. Yet, when I try to discuss the need for broader intellectual pursuits, critical thinking and rigorous discourse, Im shut down. I dont care if Kate or Kevin can score a 97% on a test at tutoring; if they refuse to engage in fundamentals such as source analysis, cant deepen their pool of knowledge to drive complex and comprehensive reasoned arguments, especially with things that are new or different, then theyll never hit 18/19/20s.

    Just some of the SACE standards for As (Modern History)

    • Critical analysis of ways in which the development of the modern world has been shaped by both internal and external forces and challenges.

    • Insightful and critical analysis of interactions and relationships in the modern world and their short-term and long-term impacts on national, regional, and/or international development.

    If tutoring is remedial, then first, have you got your SSO allocation (public system)? However, I am acutely awarehow schools rip off students of their support funding. That being said, if a school says your child should miss PE for extra English, take it. If they suggest HASS, say no (it's literacy rich, same as you wouldn't schedule remedial Math in Science).

    All that aside, I have found the following:

    • group tutoring is a waste of time. There is no substantial growth, it's extra homework and you're chewing time the child needs for life and social development

    • 1:1 tutoring only when targeted with a plan in place. For example, my child skipped several years and so by Year 11, missed foundational aspects in Math. I paid for a Math tutor (Math/Physics university student) who specifically worked to the SACE curriculum and the assignments.

    /rant - but Im sure most teachers dont want to see Australia copy the likes of South Korea in this area.

  • freefall101 on 03/02/2026 - 17:07
    +3

    By 2033, the private tutoring market size is set to increase to 1.5 billion USD.

    I'm worried about us being on the USD by 2033. Are we next after Greenland???

    • try2bhelpful on 04/02/2026 - 08:18

      If Trump has a grudge against Austria then we will be in trouble. Given the guy can’t tell Greenland and Iceland apart. Maybe Trump thinks Iceland is where he gets his ICE agents from. Somebody from Ireland was worried because they are only one letter off Iceland.

      • hoju83 on 04/02/2026 - 12:08
        +1

        If Trump does think Iceland is where he gets all his ICE agents from then Ireland should be worried if Trump decides he wants to stop all the ire coming his way.

  • p1 ama on 03/02/2026 - 14:14
    +2

    Where did the increased emphasis come from?

    The increased emphasis started when the entire education industry started to realise that there was a huge market in appealing to "nervous" middle-class parents. The problem then became self-compounding - the moment that some parents started sending their kids to tutoring, other parents then felt pressured to send their kids to tutoring.

    That said, I think that culturally what's happened over the years is a growing acceptance of parents "engineering" their children's outcomes. It's the idea that if parents do certain things, get their children into certain hobbies, engage with them in certain ways, send them to certain extracurriculars, have them attend certain schools…etc. that they can potentially influence their children's future in a certain way.

    There was a real pivot, my sense is that it started happening in the late 2000s, where tutoring went from largely being remedial (i.e. helping struggling kids) and extension-based (i.e. helping the brightest kids) to being mainstream (i.e. for the average kid).

    When I was in school (~30 years ago), parents generally only engaged with tutoring when kids needed the extra help, either because they were falling behind, or because they were very smart and needed to be extended beyond what school was able to help with.

    What are your thoughts on it?

    In a way, I really dislike the "competitive elite sports" approach to education. The reality is that education (in general) can change a child's life, but that marginal differences in education have quite marginal impacts. Whilst I think tutoring can be beneficial for certain students, too many parents have fallen for the snake oil.

    It also depends on what else the kids would be doing with that time. If the kids are just going to be playing on their iPad or whatever, then at least spending that time learning something would be better.

    That said, I think there are also a large number of parents who treat tutoring as some extra childcare. Putting their kids into a few hours of Kumon on Saturday morning or whatever is a good opportunity for the parents to go out, grab a coffee, spend some weekend time alone without their kids.

    Will you be investing in "tutoring" for your children?

    No, unless they need remedial action.

    I don't think that tutoring without purpose is particularly effective. I would rather just build good study habits and natural curiosity, encourage them to use time productively and use that to learn. Buy them books to go through, develop interests with them, develop practical skills…etc.

    • cloudy on 03/02/2026 - 16:48

      I think that culturally what's happened over the years is a growing acceptance of parents "engineering" their children's outcomes. It's the idea that if parents do certain things, get their children into certain hobbies, engage with them in certain ways, send them to certain extracurriculars, have them attend certain schools…etc. that they can potentially influence their children's future in a certain way.

      Nature vs nurture. The former was more accepted back in the days and gradually we've been taught the later matters, if not more.

  • snivy on 03/02/2026 - 14:52
    +2

    How much does it cost these days, roughly? I heard they're very expensive.

    I have a very ambivalent feeling towards it tbh, I have some friends who suffered because of it (very ambitious parents) that they still loathe their parents, some friends who didn't need them at all because they're just very brilliant, and some friends who made a lot of money from it. I also know someone who got very high ATAR, got into law, then started failing, found out the family invested in a lot of money for their education but once at uni they couldn't compete with their naturally smarter peers.

    I personally think it's better to invest the money on things the kids actually good at and enjoy doing, but honestly a lot of parents are terrible at this.

    • Muppet Detector on 03/02/2026 - 19:17
      +3

      How do you fail law if you learned how to read?

      • Lastchancetosee on 04/02/2026 - 09:33

        Exactly.

        • Muppet Detector on 10/02/2026 - 19:56

          What I meant by that was that law school was hard in the way that there was a lot of work and a lot of reading, but it wasn't hard work or necessitating anybody to be particularly "smart", just committed to putting the necessary work in.

          Most of the exams were unlimited open book, and two we even did online at home, so as long as you did the work throughout the semester (particularly your homework from tutorials), it was pretty difficult to actually fail.

          The only prerequisite required for law school is a passing grade in high school English. I think the requirement for a high ATAR score, is only to work out students who are probably committed enough to put in the amount of work that is required to pass.

    • Benoffie on 03/02/2026 - 17:51

      Depends on year level and teacher qualifications but a registered teacher doing seniors wouldnt be under $100 an hour (Adelaide)

      • Muppet Detector on 03/02/2026 - 19:18

        In contrast, Kumon is about $130 a month per subject atm.

      • jv on 03/02/2026 - 21:56

        but a registered teacher doing seniors wouldnt be under $100 an hour

        I know one that teaches English and charges $200 per hour.

        It's her full time job and if you want her services, you need to pre-book over a year ahead.

        • Benoffie on 03/02/2026 - 23:31
          +1

          Yeah that doesn't surprise me.

          More years, proven results, experience with exam setting/marking, textbook writers etc.

          The more under the belt = $$$

        • Muppet Detector on 10/02/2026 - 19:16

          One of my kids charges $160 p/h to tutor math & physics for ten hours a week.

          Also volunteers 10 hours a week of his own time to tutoring kids who are disengaged from the school curriculum.

          Has a tutoring business employing a bunch of other tutors as well, but at this stage it is only his side hustle despite it earning him more than his full time job.

  • Calmago on 03/02/2026 - 16:57
    +1

    I'm not blaming the education system here, but in my kids school they dropped phonetics and my eldest really struggles with spelling and handwriting, this is very common amongst his peers. His reading though is up to speed as they were taught site words. Dysgraphia would be the best example.

    We have taken on tutoring to help him catch back up.

    They have however reintroduced in and my youngest is thriving.

    • jv on 03/02/2026 - 22:02
      +1

      I'm not blaming the education system here, but in my kids school they dropped phonetics

      Blame the government education ministers that made the decision.

      https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/our-phonics-phob…

      • Muppet Detector on 10/02/2026 - 19:38

        Blame the government education ministers that made the decision.

        They've been swapping between a variety of approaches for at least forty years.

        At one stage (maybe 20 years ago?) we introduced a phonics program into Australia that UK had tried and tossed out twenty years earlier and no other country had reported any success in using it, ever. But hey, we just decided to give it a shot anyway because maybe we were the ones who could make it work…

        Many different phonics programs have come and gone over the years. Some apparently work, others apparently do not, whilst some work with some kids and not others.

        Of course, there are those who get no benefit from a phonics program but manage to learn how to read/spell regardless.

        It's all a bit hit/miss really.

        The most successful reported reading and spelling program world wide is one that was initially created for people with dyslexia that costs about $120 for the workbook (and instructions) that takes about six months to work through at about 15 minutes a day. Obviously, not limited to dyslexia, equally beneficial for people without learning disorders.

        Yet very few mainstream schools or curriculums make it available to their students, not even those with delayed learning/reading skills, remaining only in the purvey of Occupational Therapists and Educational Psychologists. Weird thing is, anybody can buy it from their online website, not limited to these specialist professions.

        • jv on 10/02/2026 - 20:11
          +1

          …or… parents could just read to their kids each night until they start school…

          • Muppet Detector on 10/02/2026 - 20:20
            +1

            @jv: Yes, that does often help and always very highly recommended, but sometimes, a person just has some unidentified block that delays or prevents their success, even if there are no identified learning disorders or disabilities.

            For some people, learning to read really is hard, and learning to spell somewhat accurately is even harder.

            For others, it just seems to be this innate ability that they were born with and took to it like a duck to water regardless of when their reading journey began.

            • try2bhelpful on 10/02/2026 - 22:38
              +1

              @Muppet Detector: My mother was an avid reader. My first memories are lying on the cold linoleum in summer as she read B’rer Rabbit to us. I was certainly reading very young because my family were readers. As soon as I was old enough to understand the concept of à dictionary I looked up the words I didn’t understand. If I was lazy I would ask my mother what a word meant. This came to a halt the day I asked her what a prophylactic was. Should’ve looked that one up myself. I’m one of five children and my mother read every one of our literature books at school. The only one she really objected to was Clockwork Orange.

              Provided a kid doesn’t have an actual learning disability instilling them with a love of learning is the best thing you can do. Let them see you love reading and solving problems too.

                • try2bhelpful on 11/02/2026 - 09:24
                  +1

                  @Muppet Detector: My pet peeve is lose and loose. Arghhh. This guy wrote I was an ignorant “looser” one day and it cracked me up.

                  My last comment is a real case in point for not expressing myself clearly enough. Of course every body should be provided encouragement to be the best they can and learn the love of learning from their parents. What I meant was people with learning disabilities need the extra support of experts with tailored programs. The earlier the intervention the more likely they will improve their outcome.

                  The gifted program is also a trap. The pressure to perform is immense and there is almost always someone smarter than you are. I was considered bright but the people I met at University made me feel like a dribbling moron. I quickly learnt I’m happy being a beta. I’ve had a much happier life not reaching my potential.

                  • Muppet Detector on 11/02/2026 - 10:20

                    @try2bhelpful: Not all programs for those with verified IQ's over 130 are a trap. Some are about keeping kids with their age appropriate peers rather than grade or subject advancing them, where possible.

                    Efforts to keep gifted kids who are performing (the talented part) engaged with the school curriculum.

                    Actually being gifted, is not the same as being "bright".

                    • try2bhelpful on 11/02/2026 - 11:07

                      @Muppet Detector: True, but the word gifted is bandied around a lot. I’m not sure there is an empirical measure on gifted. IQ measurement is not a valid measurement either as so much of the testing is based around experience with certain cultures and systems.

                      With reading my primary school requested permission for my mother to allow me to read books that were two grades above my age level. In early high school I was tested to have a vocabulary that put me in the top 2% in the state. Call it what you will.

                      • Muppet Detector on 11/02/2026 - 12:07

                        @try2bhelpful: Mensa determines giftedness to occur at IQ 130 and above. Wecheler intelligence tests, Stanford and Binet and Structure of the Intellect all determine that giftedness starts at IQ 130 or two standard deviations above the norm.

                        Similarly, intellectual impairment occurs at IQ 70, or two standard deviations below the norm.

                        The Australian Curriculum is designed for the average student, those having IQ's between about 85 to 115.

                        There is a curriculum for students who are two standard deviations below average, but there is no public school curriculum that caters for students whose IQ is two standard deviations above average (IQ 100).

                        Some private schools offer a pull out part time program for advanced students that they call a gifted program without any evidence of the students actually being gifted.

                        A very small number of private schools offer a full time gifted program (because a gifted student is gifted 24/7, not just a few hours a week) for students who actually are gifted and demonstrate this with accepted IQ measurement tests revealing an IQ of 130 or above.

                        • try2bhelpful on 11/02/2026 - 14:35

                          @Muppet Detector: Yeah, but as I said the IQ tests are not considered a good guide to actual intelligence. I also think the term “gifted” is pretty dodgy too. What we really should be doing is understand why the kids are like they are rather than using a nebulous term. What is it that makes it easier for these kids to do certain things? Can these methods be adapted to improve things for others? Also kids develop in different ways and timelines so someone considered less bright can flourish later on and vice versa. When I was a kid they would streamline kids into classes according to how intelligent they were perceived to be at the start of the year This set up a hierarchy that was incredibly ridged on what you were expected to achieve. The other consideration is that “gifted children” separated from their age peers may end up with a low EQ. We are currentiy seeing the terrible fallout when that happens with the tech bros.

                          Instead of labelling we need to try to determine what makes each kid tick and what motivates them. We need to give them work that stretches them but doesn’t break them. We need them to be respectful and empathic in addition to doing well academically. We need the full package for society to function properly.

                          • Muppet Detector on 11/02/2026 - 16:36

                            @try2bhelpful:

                            What we really should be doing is understand why the kids are like they are rather than using a nebulous term.

                            This is happening.

                            Instead of labelling we need to try to determine what makes each kid tick and what motivates them.

                            This is happening.

                            We need them to be respectful and empathic in addition to doing well academically.

                            This is not what it is about.

                            We need the full package for society to function properly.

                            Yes. But, as everybody is not the same, they attempt to identify and then study areas of difference so they can help as many people as possible get the best possible outcomes for themselves/the individual whilst doing what is best for society at the same time.

                            Also kids develop in different ways and timelines so someone considered less bright can flourish later on and vice versa.

                            A person's intelligence quotient does not change over time. Sometimes if a person is tested too young, those test results have been proven wrong (as in the WIIPSI - the wheshler test for six and under) at a later date. But no amount of tutoring, practise or any other type of performance development tool changes the intelligence quotient.

                            EG: if a person is intellectually impaired (an IQ of 70 or under), no amount of intervention will ever change that.

                            If somebody has an IQ of 115, no amount of performance enhancement or deprivation will change that number. The performance enhancement may improve their performance (and thus be bright or talented), but this does not change what their IQ is.

                            The two standard world wide accepted tests to measure Intelligence Quotient, test your verbal intelligence and non verbal intelligence, find an average of those two scores and produce your IQ number.

                            It has been identified that an IQ # of 100 is the average for the population.

                            There are 15 points in a stanine.

                            So far, they have determined that those with average IQ's learn in similar ways (eg this is how their brains process and move information between short term, long term and working memory => the way they learn).

                            This is about 80% of the population which is why our school curriculums (among other things) are designed for those who learn/use information in that way - catering to the majority of the population.

                            Of course, there can be other factors which impact how a person engages with all that, but this is in addition to their IQ score.

                            Just because a person has an IQ above 130, does not exclude them from having learning disorders or other factors influencing the potential they would otherwise be capable of.

                            Now, on either side of that average 80%, are obviously 10% who are below average and 10% who are above average.

                            An IQ of 70 is identified as Intellectually impaired because it has been known for many decades, that children with an IQ of two standard deviations (30 IQ points), learn differently to their average peers.

                            This is why these people are provided with an entirely different curriculum to their average peers, because the set up of their brain, and how it accesses, manipulates and stores data/information is different to how the average brain works.

                            At this stage, they just assumed that those with IQs 2 standard deviations above average (so IQ's of 130 and above), could just adapt to the curriculum designed for the 80% with average IQ's.

                            However, they started working out that a very large number of students with IQ's if 130 and above were dropping out of school very early after appearing to actually fail school, but also a very large number of those with IQ's over 130, were depressed etc and committing suicide at a greater rate then their average peers.

                            This all came to a head about 70 years ago when they finally started identifying these trends and began focused study.

                            Lo and behold, they finally realised that these kids were not just able to adapt to accessing information in the same way as their average peers and this was the underlying cause of the high drop out, poor mental health/suicide (and other self harm behaviours), disengaging from the curriculum, becoming bored, behaving like the class clown disrupting others before finally dropping out of school too early.

                            They finally worked out that just as those with IQ's two standard deviations below average had brains that worked differently to average and couldn't adapt "up", so too did those with IQ's two standard deviations above average, and their brains could not adapt and work "down" because it simply operated in a different way.

                            A lot of work, research and study began happening about this time and accumulated and developed until researchers felt comfortable implementing processes to cater for this.

                            Fast forward to about 30 years ago, those interested in helping students access an education delivered in a manner they were capable of doing so, started implementing these processes into main stream schooling.

                            However, the government has never adopted these curriculums into public schools in Australia like they did for those at the other end of the spectrum. Because it is cost prohibitive to develop and deliver a curriculum that only benefits 2.5% of the population.

                            But, some private schools began adopting it on a part time basis to augment their usual curriculums.

                            However, as only about 2-2.5% of the population had an IQ of 130 or over, it wasn't very practical for most schools to offer a full time curriculum, despite these kids having IQ's of 130 or above 24/7.

                            Thus there are only a very small number of schools who offer a full time curriculum for those with IQ's above 130. For example, there is only one school in the whole of Queensland who offers this and at primary level, this is only 15 spaces per year level for the G&T in addition to their usual streams that utilise the School Curriculum for the average student.

                            For High School, they were able to adopt their timetables so that students could largely remain with their same aged peers where relevant (as in sport, personal development, art, home ec… etc, but move between different year levels (higher and lower) in specific subjects as their skills allowed.

                            So in key academic subjects such as Math, Science or English, every student in every year level attended those subjects at the same time.

                            Thus, for those key learning areas only, where the overt curriculum was the objective, students moved between year levels according to their level of performance at the rate they were able to perform at those levels.

                            Meaning, they didn't just move up a year level because this was when the govt said to based on age (regardless of pass or fail), but on ability/performance based on mastery for that topic/subject in any particular subject.

                            This meant (in most cases) that a child was enrolled in grade 8 because they were 13 (as required by Aust curriculum) and did a lot of subjects at that level, but could move to grade 9 or beyond for subjects where they could perform mastery of the level before.

                            This then extended to agreements with local universities to allow ongoing early access to university level subjects when they had completed the yr 12 curriculum in that subject. Meaning, they didn't have to just stop learning a particular subject or wait for others to catch up so the class could move on, they could continue if they wanted at extended levels and/or opt to take on additional subjects offered by the school, tafe courses etc that they otherwise would not have been able to fit into their timetable.

                            Gifted education is not about producing high performers in the academic arena, it is about providing those who learn differently to their average peers, a curriculum that their brains can access and is delivered in the manner that facilitates this.

                            More often than not, those with IQ's in this gifted range consider this to be a disability and a barrier to accessing things designed for average IQ's as opposed to being some kind of advantage or positive attribute.

                            Thus, their education must also include resources and assistance from professionals such as occupational therapists and educational psychologists throughout their educational journey and continuing on into relevant aspects of their adult life including uni and beyond.

                            • try2bhelpful on 11/02/2026 - 17:07

                              @Muppet Detector: Sorry mate my eyes are now glazing over. This is obviously something you feel passionately about but you really need to do some serious googling on the drawbacks of IQ testing. I will leave you to it.

                              • Muppet Detector on 11/02/2026 - 17:47

                                @try2bhelpful:

                                Sorry mate my eyes are now glazing over. This is obviously something you feel passionately about but you really need to do some serious googling on the drawbacks of IQ testing. I will leave you to it.

                                I have literally been studying this for twenty eight years.

                                This and other factors addressing how a student accesses the curriculum.

                                I cannot help it if you or anybody else thinks the definition of "gifted" means something else.

                                Regardless of the benefits or drawbacks of measuring the two areas of intelligence to achieve the IQ score in this area, it does not change the fact that the definition of "gifted" includes an IQ of 130 or above.

                              • Muppet Detector on 11/02/2026 - 17:49

                                @try2bhelpful:

                                Sorry mate my eyes are now glazing over.

                                Yeah, why go to the effort of learning what the term "gifted" actually means, eh?

                                Much more fun to continue to use it incorrectly and believe that it means something different.

                                • try2bhelpful on 11/02/2026 - 18:20

                                  @Muppet Detector: Actually I don’t think the term has much real meaning. As I’ve indicated there are a lot of issues with trying to use IQ tests as a measurement; do some Googling on this. However, no problem with you using it if you feel it helps you. I’m not going yo keep reading your screeds on this topic. However, again, if they make you feel better writing them then go ahead. You do you; but there might be a reason why society doesn’t do what you want it to.

                                  I’m not going to reply again.

                          • Muppet Detector on 11/02/2026 - 17:40

                            @try2bhelpful:

                            Yeah, but as I said the IQ tests are not considered a good guide to actual intelligence.

                            This is precisely what they do. They measure a persons verbal iQ and their non verbal IQ, then determine the average of those two scores to determine one overarching score to represent their overarching IQ score.

                            It is literally what they do. This is their purpose/job.

                            I also think the term “gifted” is pretty dodgy too.

                            Why? What label would you apply to those with IQ's above 130? The label doesn't matter, it is what that label means that matters.

                            An IQ of 130 or above is one of the elements included in the definition of "gifted".

                            Almost everything is categorised and labelled into groups with similar characteristics whether they be types of animals, whether they be planets, moons, types of energies, races, religions, sex, gender, type of vehicle, boat, aircraft, knife, weapon, sport, disabilities, illnesses, viruses, bacterium, political parties, fruit, vegetables, meat, seafood…

                            In order to best study them, research them, develop them, understand them, utilise them, apply them, access them etc

                            But each label captures the characteristics applicable to that label or category and their definition.

                            A person's IQ, is just one of those categories.

                            What we really should be doing is understand why the kids are like they are rather than using a nebulous term.

                            Whoaaaa, do not confuse an education (or other resource) for a person with an IQ of 130 which is the definition of the term/label "gifted", with what marketing attempts falsely use those terms for appearances and optics etc, or with what others mistakenly assume the definition of the word "gifted" is and what it actually means.

                            The definition of "gifted" does not include a level of performance such as "bright".

                            What is it that makes it easier for these kids to do certain things?

                            They have done this and continue to do this.

                            They also recognise why this makes some things harder for them too.

                            Also kids develop in different ways and timelines so someone considered less bright can flourish later on and vice versa.

                            A person's performance at a particular point in time does not change or alter their IQ.

                            "Bright" does not mean "gifted".

                            "Gifted" is not an indication of how a person is performing.

                            A child who is failing is still "gifted", if their IQ is 130 or over.

                            The definition of the term gifted has absolutely nothing to do with how a person is performing at any point in time

                            Can these methods be adapted to improve things for others?

                            Probably not. Being gifted is no different to you being classified as a human. There is nothing that can change you from a human into a fish.

                            If you have depression, you cannot change how you address that with multiple personality disorder.

                            You cannot treat heart disease the same way you treat a broken leg.

                            The term is literally a definition which classifies and categorises certain characteristics.

                            When I was a kid they would streamline kids into classes according to how intelligent they were perceived to be at the start of the year

                            No, they didn't. This was done according to your performances and level of skill development.

                            They were absolutely not streamlining you based on your intelligence (unless you met the criteria for intellectually impaired).

                            level of performance IS NOT your intelligence quotient

                            The other consideration is that “gifted children” separated from their age peers may end up with a low EQ.

                            You are now discussing two different areas of intelligence. To date, there are 26 which have been identified and measured.

                            Intelligence Quotient IS different to your EQ.

                            The reason you have identified is why they are now developing curriculums to keep Gifted students with other same aged gifted students.

                            They are addressing that school also includes the covert curriculum.

                            Instead of labelling we need to try to determine what makes each kid tick and what motivates them.

                            Labelling them as "gifted", is no different to labelling them as "dyslexic", "vision impaired", intellectually impaired, "ADHD", "Autistic", "hearing impaired".

                            This is precisely why we do allocate them into different categories with specific criteria to qualify for that label.

                            So we can work out "how they tick", "what motivates them", "how they learn", "what adjustments or tools that they need to access their job (being school for a kid)" and so on.

                            We have been doing this for 80 odd years for those of average intelligence, those with below average intelligence and all the other labels that determine or influence how a person with those traits accesses the curriculum/.their education. They are finally doing the same with those with a higher intelligence quotient than average.

                            We need them to be respectful and empathic in addition to doing well academically.

                            Education for gifted students is not about academic performance. It is about providing them with a curriculum that they can access.

                            We need the full package for society to function properly.

                            Yes, but the school's role in "the full package"; does not include every aspect of how society functions.

                            School attendance only has four expected purposes and/or functions, it was never intended to address every aspect of of society.

                            and one of them is to deliver an overt education - the actual curriculum to its students in a manner that each student is able to access that curriculum.

          • tenpercent on 10/02/2026 - 20:15

            @jv: And then stop?

            • jv on 10/02/2026 - 20:17

              @tenpercent: That's when they read on their own and don't want you reading to them…

              • tenpercent on 10/02/2026 - 20:18
                +1

                @jv: sad face emoji

                • jv on 10/02/2026 - 20:19
                  +1

                  @tenpercent: Good memories though…

                  We used to visit our local library usually once a week and stock up on books…
                  Both kids had learnt to read at 4-5 yo, before they started prep.

                  When they got older, I used to still go to the library and borrow half a dozen books/magazines on general knowledge, non-fiction, science etc…
                  and they were always on the kitchen table for them to browse through…

              • Muppet Detector on 10/02/2026 - 20:32
                +1

                @jv:

                That's when they read on their own and don't want you reading to them…

                Really? Then how do you check in on their progress after that, particularly their reading comprehension and determining that they are actually reading what is written and identifying which definition they are attributing to the way that word is spelled?

                We used to alternate between one of us (sometimes an older, competent sibling), reading to them and then have them reading to us (or sibling) for a long time.

                These days I primarily access books through audible where possible - absolutely love having a bedtime story read to me as I get ready to go to sleep haha.

                • jv on 10/02/2026 - 21:02
                  +1

                  @Muppet Detector:

                  Really? Then how do you check in on their progress after that

                  They were reading their own books, in addition to school work…

                  My kids have grown up mainly independent learners. They prefer to solve problems themselves and only came to me when they were really stuck. Now one is at Uni and the other doing year 12 and they hardly ever ask me for help. They find the answer they are looking for either online or with their friends… Sometimes, they even ask their teacher…

        • Amazing2b on 26/02/2026 - 09:20

          Share please? Name of book?

  • try2bhelpful on 04/02/2026 - 08:23
    +1

    Just had a new cooktop, oven and extractor fan installed. Being a tradie is a lucrative job.

  • Lastchancetosee on 04/02/2026 - 09:42
    +1

    I 'tutored' my youngest in written English when we moved back to Australia. We did it for a couple of hours a day at the school for about three months. After that he was managing so I stopped.

    The only formal paid tutoring my children had was my eldest son who was struggling with a particular concept in statistics at uni. He found a PG student and paid for his lessons from his part-time job earnings for a few weeks. It helped give him a good foundation in the subject so he felt it was money well spent.

    In my experience, children get a lot of informal teaching from their parents, particularly if the parents are educated, educators, or have the time to help with homework and answer questions, so maybe we should include that.

  • Grunntt on 04/02/2026 - 12:39
    +1

    Not too sure I'd be putting too much faith in a company's 'research' when they appear to generate one report and then just massage it for as many countries as they can sell it to.
    Look at the righthand side of the OP's link.

    Australia
    Global
    North America
    United States
    Canada
    Europe

    etc….

  • Rockets84 on 04/02/2026 - 15:31
    +1

    My son just finished year 12 and he had a tutor for Maths Spec or what we used to call Calculus. Mainly it was becasue his teacher wasn't very good at conveying the course material well, same for me with Physics when I was in Year 11 & 12. I don't see any issue with this type of tutoring. This is a big issue in Australia in that teaching has lost all it's prestige as a profession and the entry marks to get into teaching at Uni are worryingly low. My parents were teachers and when they started they got paid the same as a back bencher in politics, it's not like that now by a long shot.

    What I find crazy is I've seen parents in our local area Facebook group asking for tutors for their kids that are in Year 3 or 5. Then I see people advertising NAPLAN or GATE tutoring which is completely against the point of those tests. NAPLAN is intended to find out where a school or class may be lagging, by tutoring you're skewing the results to be better than they should be, NAPLAN was never intended to be a competition. Same for the Gifted And Talented testing, as a parent of kid who was a genuine GATE kid, it's not meant to be this prestigious thing. It's a programme designed so that the really smart kids can do the normal school work at an accelerated pace and then do some other things to keep them engaged and not around bored or causing problems because they've done everything. I know they keep adjusting the GATE testing so it filters out the tutored kids becasue they will struggle in a GATE programmes pace.

    • NotReallyaMoneySaver on 05/02/2026 - 10:18
      +1

      Tutoring as a complementary thing is different to it being supplementary. I absolutely agree that tutoring can be beneficial when you don't understand a certain aspect but to treat it as supplementary and necessary is just isn't it

  • Clear on 03/02/2026 - 13:18

    I went to school in Papua New Guinea for a while. Being an international school there were Australian teachers but I had tutoring to catch up regardless, as their standards were well below ours at the time. For my kids I'd rather send them to a private school over public and maybe do tutoring if they're falling behind.

    • Muppet Detector on 03/02/2026 - 19:12

      For my kids I'd rather send them to a private school over public and maybe do tutoring if they're falling behind.

      Many parents don't realise when their child has fallen behind though. Or rather what behind looks like and when it is necessary to pull the trigger and do something about it.

      Some work with the belief that prevention is better than cure. This works in education as well :)

    • jv on 03/02/2026 - 15:01
      -1

      I went to school in Papua New Guinea for a while.

      Yes, I saw the video…

  • jv on 03/02/2026 - 14:19

    What Are Your Thoughts on The Amount of Emphasis Placed on Tutoring in Primary and Secondary Education?

    Emphasis by whom ?

  • tyarrhea on 04/02/2026 - 09:43
    -1

    It's good. Australian kids need to be competitive with their global peers. Tutoring is for those kids who will compete with future high skilled immigration, it will be political suicide if any government decides to limit that.

    Only way out of this rabbit hole is to cut back on the wokey curriculum and stream students at the beginning of each year so disruptive kids are not impeding the education of others.

    • NotReallyaMoneySaver on 04/02/2026 - 09:55
      +1

      The curriculum is far behind many other countries, especially Asian countries. If you want Australian kids to be competitive, then fix the curriculum.

      Tutoring is just a bandaid to the issue that is the education system.

  • Muppet Detector on 03/02/2026 - 18:34
    -3

    What Are Your Thoughts on The Amount of Emphasis Placed on Tutoring in Primary and Secondary Education?

    In Australia, with rare exception, I believe that it absolutely essential in primary school.

    High school on an as needs basis or if child wants to pursue accelerated and/or extended learning.

    It feels like in the past 5-10 years, tutoring has become far more common than it has many years prior

    During Covid, as a fair bit of schooling moved to the home environment, I think that a lot of parents acquired a better understanding of what their child's education actually looked like.

    When they graduate, they start their own tutoring companies.

    It's a lucrative industry (even as a casual independent side hustle) that requires very little set up and absolutely no qualifications. (Apart from blue card/ working with children).

    Some start tutoring whilst still school students themselves even as paying part time jobs.

    Many uni students are employed by their universities to lead initiatives such as PASS => structured Peer Assisted Study Sessions.

    Still other uni students advertise independently to tutor other students (and school kids) in areas of study/subjects they have already completed.

    Uni students are usually much cheaper than other tutors.

    Where did the increased emphasis come from?

    Kids are now competing for jobs (and uni placements) with the rest of the world. If they hope to compete with the rest of the world, then they need a world class education.

    The Australian curriculum does not offer this.

    Will you be investing in "tutoring" for your children?

    I did and have no regrets. It was about helping them to reach their true potential and giving them the choice to choose a career they wanted/not be limited by their academic education when that was something I did have some control over.

    When it came to them deciding on a career, I didn't care if they chose to be sewerage collectors. But I wanted them to be able to choose that job if they wanted to do it, not because it was the only thing they were qualified to do.

    Similarly, if my kid grew up and wanted to be a nuclear physicist who invented rockets as a side hustle, I wanted to make sure that I had done my best to make that possible for them if they had such an ability.

    The thing is, often a kid doesn't really know what they want to do "when they grow up" and if you wait until grade ten or after to start working towards that, there is a possibility that it will be too late and your kid will have to settle on something else.

    A good education is never wasted.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join