I get that competition is helpful for some students... but those at selective schools get that at school.
I understand the motivation of the tutoring companies, largeish / classroom groups is much more profitable than one-on-one tutoring, and I understand the appeal that the cost for each student is less. What I don't understand is the appeal of a classroom teaching style similar to school over a individualised / personalised modality, except for cost. Yes, some of the teachers in these companies are likely inspiring and more skilled than some school teachers and I don't doubt that some great teaching happens. I went to a highly selective school where many people went to tutoring and I know that the overall teaching standard was not that bad. Obviously, I am biased - I do individual tuition - but I do genuinely struggle to understand the appeal of spending hours of non-school time in more classroom-based teaching.
For me it was a couple of things that differentiated classroom-like tutoring to actual school teaching.
>Competition, as you see people from top schools and if you go to a poor school this can motivate you to work harder.
>Make more connections to friends that can help you throughout your HSC.
>Cheaper most of the time compared to one to one tutoring.
>Teacher always woke us up by throwing jokes in or forcing someone to answer questions, this makes the entire class more focused. Compare this to a school setting where students may/may not be slacking off.
>Teacher always motivated us to work hard, was extremely useful as it kept people going during the HSC.
>For my tutoring centre they posted results on the board outside so everyone can take a look at the term results (anyone in the public). Nobody wants to be last so it forces everyone to actually study.
I can't really compare it to one-to-one tutoring but that's my list of positives for a tutoring centre.