If tutors really do reliably produce two-sigma learning gains, then why aren't most top achievers the product of tutors? Yes, they're expensive, but perhaps "only" 2-3x private school; there are a lot of wealthy parents. Diminishing returns for high achievers?
Conversation
I am seeing more extremely wealthy people (eg billionaires) shift to tutors.
But even then you’re right, if it’s a full two sigma you would expect basically every high performer to be from a tutor.
Seems like there’s an asymptotic level of ultimate max performance?
7
2
33
Or, more likely IMO, most tutors help a lot initially, but asymptote at modest levels of performance.
Many (most?) of the high performers I know had tutors who were themselves extremely talented.
1
1
29
That's very interesting! Curious: when you say "tutors," would "mentors" or "coaches" work roughly as well? I wonder if I'm using the word differently: I can think of many high performers with mentors/coaches but few with personal instructors (a la Bloom).
2
9
Yes. Whatever is most appropriate for a person's growth at their current skill level. Many people will rapidly outgrow the kind of tutoring Bloom described.
1
1
4
I like that way of unifying the terms!
Yeah, it should fit where the bottleneck is for a student.
Most kids have inadequate motivation, context, support, or encouragement so need more time w a tutor/teacher who cares.
A few are bottlenecked by knowledge+depth of their teachers. There true expertise is essential.
1