Post by : Anis Farhan

An Industry in the Shadows

In almost every Southeast Asian city, from Kuala Lumpur to Jakarta, from Bangkok to Manila, one trend binds middle-class families together — the rush to private tuition centers. Cram schools, enrichment academies, and private tutors have become essential fixtures of the education landscape. But behind the promise of higher grades lies a more troubling reality: Is the growing dependence on private coaching quietly deepening the class divide in education?

Once viewed as supplementary support, private tuition is now seen by many parents as a necessity — an insurance policy against underperforming schools, overloaded syllabi, and high-stakes exams. As a result, an informal education economy worth billions is flourishing, often outpacing government efforts to create an equitable public system.

The Rise of a Parallel System

Private tutoring has exploded in popularity across ASEAN nations, driven by intense academic competition and perceived inadequacies in public education. In Singapore, the tuition industry is estimated to be worth over $1 billion annually. In Thailand and Indonesia, private coaching centers advertise aggressively, often using star tutors with celebrity status. In the Philippines, high school students take coaching for university entrance exams years in advance.

Parents, anxious about their children’s future, are spending a significant portion of their income on after-school classes — from math and science to coding and communication skills. In some urban areas, children attend as many as three to four tuition sessions per week, effectively extending their school hours deep into the evening.

This has led to the formation of what some experts call a “shadow education system” — one that mirrors the curriculum of public schools but exists outside state regulation, curriculum oversight, and accountability.

Unequal Access, Unequal Outcomes

The problem with this growing reliance on tuition is not its effectiveness — it often works. The problem is who gets access to it.

For affluent families, private coaching is a tool to enhance learning, build confidence, and get ahead in exams. For lower-income households, however, the cost of tuition is prohibitive. The result is a widening academic gap between students who can afford extra help and those who cannot.

This inequality is not hypothetical. In Malaysia, a study by the Ministry of Education showed that students attending private tuition scored significantly higher in national exams. In Vietnam, top-performing students disproportionately came from families who had access to extra tutoring. The system rewards those with financial means, reinforcing privilege instead of challenging it.

Pressure on Students and Families

Tuition culture also comes with a psychological cost. Children are now expected to excel not only in school but also in multiple coaching classes. The pressure to outperform leads to stress, burnout, and in some cases, disengagement from learning altogether.

Parents, meanwhile, face financial strain — cutting back on savings or taking on additional jobs to fund their children's tuition. For single-income or rural households, this creates additional emotional and economic burdens. The fear of being left behind pushes families into a cycle that may not be sustainable.

Moreover, in focusing narrowly on test performance, many tuition centers prioritize rote memorization over critical thinking or creativity. Students may emerge with high marks, but not necessarily with better understanding or long-term skills.

Government Regulation and Policy Blind Spots

Most Southeast Asian countries have not adequately regulated the private tuition industry. While some, like Singapore, have licensing systems and guidelines, enforcement is often limited. In countries like Indonesia and the Philippines, many tutoring centers operate informally — with no quality checks, fee caps, or student protections.

This lack of oversight creates room for exploitative practices. Unqualified tutors, inflated pricing, and misleading advertising are common. Some public school teachers moonlight as private tutors, raising ethical concerns and potential conflicts of interest.

More importantly, governments have yet to address the root causes driving tuition dependency — underfunded public schools, overcrowded classrooms, and exam-centric education systems. Without systemic reform, regulating tuition alone won’t solve the deeper issues of inequity and access.

Alternatives and Solutions

To reverse this trend, Southeast Asia needs to focus on strengthening the core public education system so that private tuition becomes optional, not essential.

• Teacher training and support must be prioritized, ensuring that classroom instruction meets student needs.

• Reducing curriculum overload can ease pressure and allow for more holistic learning.

• After-school academic support funded by the government or NGOs can offer free or low-cost tutoring in underserved areas.

• Public-private partnerships can be leveraged to develop quality, low-cost EdTech platforms tailored for students who lack access to in-person coaching.

At the same time, parents must be engaged in conversations around redefining success — moving away from grades alone to value well-being, curiosity, and life skills.

A Future Beyond the Coaching Race

The explosion of private tuition is not simply about academics. It reflects deeper anxieties about opportunity, social mobility, and fairness. In an ideal world, every child — regardless of income — would have access to quality education within the school system itself.

Southeast Asia has made impressive strides in enrollment and literacy. But if learning outcomes remain tied to private spending, then education risks becoming a commodity, not a right.

Reforming public education is hard. But it is the only path to ensuring that success in the classroom depends on talent and effort — not on who can afford a better tutor.

Disclaimer

This article is intended for informational and editorial purposes only. It does not represent the views of any coaching institute, education ministry, or regulatory body. For formal education policy, readers should consult their national education authority.