WAHM Forums

The WAHM community forum was created to be a place for work at home moms to share their ideas and stories. In the forum you can find information about work at home jobs, starting home businesses, avoiding scams, and surviving the WAHM lifestyle. In support of the WAHM community, WAHM.com also features instructional articles, easy recipes, as well as job and business listings tailored specifically to work at home opportunities.

03-20-2012, 02:47 AM
I did the mock session (in mathematics.) I incorporated eliciting the student to find out what the student knew, and trying to have him do as much as possible, rather than me do it - just like the videos said to do it. Then I just got a simple rejection - no evaluation that at least told where I was deficient, and where to get better, etc.

I am wondering - is tutor.com just looking for "naturals" who just do everything just right, and simply cast off those who don't seem to be such? I suppose that in this wretched economy, even the small pay of $13/hr is enough to product an overflow of applicants, so tutor.com can be extraordinarily picky (just like every other employer!)

Perhaps tutor.com really hires a lot of Indians from Kolkata, and the application process is just a front to make it look like they hire Americans? (I'm especially cynical since I am unemployable as a software engineer precisely because of this type of abuse.)

03-20-2012, 07:51 AM
Hi, swampwiz!

While student involvement is certainly an important factor in any online session, there are several other factors that we consider when reviewing a mock session. Content knowledge, comfort using the online classroom, session pacing and professionalism are just a few examples of the many factors that we consider when our team evaluates a candidate's performance.

While I certainly understand its value, due to the volume of applicants moving through our system, we unfortunately do not have the ability to offer personalized feedback to each candidate upon rejection.

I can also assure you that the application process is not a front of any kind.

I hope this helps to clarify the situation! Should you have any other questions or concerns, please feel free to contact us at support.tutor.com

03-20-2012, 10:11 AM
So basically, what you are saying is that you just give your prospective tutors the videos and manuals, etc., and let them determine exactly how to structure and pace a lesson, and if a prospective tutor doesn't hit the target just right, you simply cast him off as not good enough, without even informing him about how he was deficient, etc. - and that you do look at someone as being a "natural", and a "natural" at exactly the level of pacing, elicitation, etc. that you want - and you are smug that it is the tutor's responsibility to *exactly* determine the proper level of pacing, elicitation, etc., based simply on his interpretation of those videos, manuals, etc. I suppose that when you are looking for X # of tutors and Y # of folks apply, you simply go through and hire the highest grading X/Y portion of the applicants, and don't even give the courtesy to those that don't make the initial grade of how they can improve.

I guess that when I applied and saw how difficult the test were, that the applicant culling was mainly done there. Evidently there are lot more well educated folks ("the volume of applicants moving though") who can pass the tests and who would like to earn the modest wages then positions open at inline tutoring venues than I had originally thought - and obviously some who could distill from your videos how to exactly pace a session. Oh well, I guess it's the same attitude that car dealerships have with their salesmen ("here's a manual on how to sell, and if you don't meet your quota this month, you're out the door!")

Of course, this all presupposes that you are telling the truth about not hiring Indians ...

03-21-2012, 06:18 AM
swampwiz, I don't want to start a flame war, but I find your posts increasingly unprofessional and your comments about Indians extremely offensive. It's clear from your previous posts that you have an ax to grind. Fine, but this board is not the place for that. Many companies hiring work-at-home contractors and employees post jobs and look at these boards and it reflects very badly on the people who approach the work-at-home job sector with professional and realistic goals and expectations.

The Tutor.com rep responded to your questions honestly and professionally. You could have at least shown the same courtesy. I've been working at home for the last 4 years and I've come to find that I can't expect to be given feedback at every turn so I had to learn how to self-analyze my own work to see where I may have gone wrong and what I could do better for future job applications.

So rather than gripe and post offensive comments that are completely inappropriate, maybe your time would be better spent trying to figure out what you might not have done well in the mock online session and learn from it for future jobs that you apply for.


03-21-2012, 08:46 AM
The thing is tutor.com does not give out any information regarding why a prospective tutor has been deemed as not good enough. It's like I said - tutor.com just figures that there are some folks that know naturally how to do it the way they want it to be done, and they figure that they may as well only hire those folks instead of trying to get the failures to get better (although, gee how hard would it be to write a few sentences?) The only reason that tutor.com can do this is that there must be a large ratio of prospective tutors (i.e., that pass the very rigorous content exam) to actual positions. I have no problem with that - I just want to point it out, as it seems that tutor.com does not seem to treat its tutors all that well.

As for the Indians, I mean no demeaning against them. However, we all know that one of the main reasons that we have such an extraordinarily difficult and brutish employment environment - both as work-at-home, and as canonical on-site work - is that firms that in the past would have hired us are now hiring folks in low wage countries, like India (and especially India as it is basically the only large low wage country where English is popular.) Especially for any type of work that does not require an onsite premise - or even a voice presence - I just have to think that a firm would try as much as possible to hire folks in India at the low wage rate there, than hire an American at even a relatively low rate. Such an employment policy would be in the "best interest of increasing shareholder value." (BTW, that line was always in the layoff announcement letters that were common in my layoff dodging days in the 90's.) I suppose that I should use the more politically correct term of "low wage offshore labor" rather than put a national people. I'll try to remember that in the future.

05-19-2012, 11:47 AM
I've been working for tutor.com for 3 years, and find that they treat their tutors very well. Tutor.com actually only hires tutors from the U.S. and Canada, so your comment about Indian tutors is unwarranted. Tutor.com has its testing in place for a reason - to determine which individuals will be successful as online tutors. If you didn't pass the test, that's because you are not a good fit for this particular program. I find it extremely harsh to blame this on the company. Some people are just better qualified for online tutoring than others.

07-18-2012, 04:26 AM
If you are wishing you could still work for this company look to the reason why they turned you down and what you can do about it.

07-18-2012, 06:03 PM
Why don't you try Wyzant.com? They are a similar online tutoring agency.