Major Aussie tutoring company suddenly shuts down and tells parents to turn to AI instead: ‘Overpriced’
Dymocks Tutoring and Talent 100 will close its five Sydney centres this week after deciding that AI tools offer a cheaper alternative to traditional tutoring. The company’s chief executive said parents paying up to $900 per subject could receive similar study support from services such as Claude, Gemini and OpenAI for about $30 a month, although he acknowledged that AI was less effective than human tutors. The decision has prompted criticism from parents and tutoring representatives, who argue that personal encouragement and human connection remain important.
The closure comes amid wider concerns about technology’s impact on education. Australian teenagers recently recorded their lowest literacy and maths results in two decades, with scores declining steadily since 2009, while New South Wales and Victoria have introduced restrictions on smartphones and other devices in schools. The announcement also coincided with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese calling for stronger international safeguards on artificial intelligence.
- Major Australian tutoring centres are closing this week.
- The company says AI offers cheaper study support.
- Critics warn that human motivation and connection still matter.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The shift to AI tutoring represents genuine democratisation of educational access. When traditional tutoring costs up to $900 per subject monthly, many families are simply excluded from supplementary education entirely. AI services at $30 monthly could extend meaningful academic support to vastly more students regardless of family income, and the availability of on-demand, 24/7 assistance addresses real limitations of human tutors constrained by scheduling. Whilst AI is indeed less effective than human tutors, a similar study benefit for a thirtieth of the cost represents a rational trade-off that expands opportunity rather than restricting education to wealthy families.
The case against
Human tutoring offers irreplaceable pedagogical value that extends beyond content delivery. Personal encouragement, adaptive feedback grounded in genuine relationship-building, and the mentoring dimension of education cannot be replicated by algorithms, regardless of sophistication. The timing is particularly troubling given Australia's already-declining literacy and mathematics outcomes over two decades, suggesting supplementary education is increasingly vital rather than optional. The company's own acknowledgement that AI is less effective should prompt caution about substituting economic convenience for educational quality, particularly for students who lack the self-direction and motivation that independent AI-based study demands.