Paying for A-Level Maths tuition is only worth it if you can see a change in your child’s work on the page (clearer methods, fewer repeated errors, and better exam decisions under time pressure). Some students can get “decent marks” by copying patterns from past papers, but then struggle on unfamiliar questions, proof-style reasoning, or modelling where assumptions matter.
This checklist uses a simple angle: vet an A-Level Maths tutor by auditing their first four sessions for three non-negotiables (diagnostic precision, method-mark teaching, and exam-board alignment). Credentials and confidence matter less than whether the tutor can reliably improve your child’s written solutions, topic by topic. You can use it as a parent checklist tutoring tool even if you are not confident with A-Level maths yourself.
The parent’s goal: evidence the tutor can change your child’s work (not just explain maths)
A-Level Maths tutoring can sound impressive in the moment, especially if the tutor explains clearly. Judge the output: does your child produce complete solutions with correct notation, a stated method, and steps that match how marks are awarded?
Ask for evidence you can see after each session: one or two marked exam questions, corrections written in full, and a short note of what to practise next. A strong tutor builds a repeatable loop: diagnose, teach a method, practise it in mixed questions, then mark for method marks and fix the error pattern.
Step 1: Confirm the real problem (A-Level content vs GCSE foundations vs exam technique)
Many A-Level “bottlenecks” are not purely topic gaps. A student stuck on integration may actually be struggling to rearrange expressions, spot a substitution, or keep track of negative signs. A student avoiding proof or modelling may understand the algebra but not what counts as a valid justification or assumption.
A tutor should separate three strands quickly: A-Level content (for example, implicit differentiation, parametric differentiation, proof by contradiction, or differential equations in modelling); GCSE foundations that slow everything down (algebraic manipulation, functions, indices, fractions); and exam technique (method selection, layout for method marks, and timing). If the tutor cannot name which strand is limiting marks, the plan tends to drift.
Quick readiness check: the GCSE gaps that sabotage A-Level Maths (and how a tutor should handle them)
You do not need a full GCSE re-teach, but you do need fluency in a few areas to make A-Level work efficient. Common gaps include: rearranging formulae without losing terms, factorising and simplifying rational expressions, indices and surds, completing the square, and interpreting functions (domain, range, inverse, composite).
A good tutor handles this without wasting A-Level lesson time by using “micro-interventions”. For example, if a differentiation question goes wrong because of algebra, they pause for five minutes to drill the exact manipulation, then return to the A-Level question and re-write the full solution. They then set a short, targeted homework set: three algebra questions plus three A-Level questions that require the same algebra.
Step 2: Check exam-board and module fit (Pure + Mechanics/Statistics) before you book
Before booking a block of lessons, confirm the exam board and options: AQA, Edexcel, OCR A, OCR B (MEI), or WJEC, and whether your child is doing Mechanics or Statistics. This matters because the depth, style, and emphasis differ.
Ask the tutor to look at two recent assessments or a set of past-paper questions from your child’s board. Within a few minutes they should be able to comment on: which topics are being tested, what the mark scheme is rewarding, and which module skills are likely to be the sticking point. If your child is switching resources, the tutor should recommend one consistent set of papers and one consistent textbook or question bank to make progress measurable.
What ‘exam-board aligned’ looks like in practice (topics, wording, method marks, calculator expectations)
Exam-board alignment is not just “covering the same topics”. It shows up in the tutor’s choices: the notation they expect, the standard methods the mark scheme rewards, and the calculator habits that save time without losing accuracy. For example, some questions reward a clear method statement (such as “use integration by parts” or “let u = …”), and many applied questions reward interpretation, units, and modelling assumptions.
A tutor aligned to the board will teach with mark schemes in mind. They will show where method marks are won or lost, and train your child to write the line that earns the mark. They will also address calculator expectations: when to use exact values, when to round, how to use solve/nSolve sensibly, and how to check a result quickly.
What the First 4 Tutoring Sessions Should Look Like
Session 1 should be diagnostic-led, not a generic “what are you doing in class?” chat. A strong tutor will ask for recent work, set a short mixed diagnostic, and watch how your child writes (notation, algebra accuracy, and whether they can explain why a method applies). After the session, you should receive a brief error map: 3 to 5 priority issues, split into content, foundations, and exam technique.
Session 2 should tackle one bottleneck properly, using method-mark teaching. The tutor should model a full solution, then get your child to write a similar solution with prompts reduced, and then mark it against a mark scheme. Session 3 should move to exam-style application under light time pressure: a small set of questions where method selection matters, followed by corrections written in full. Session 4 should act as a checkpoint: review the error log, compare early and recent work, and agree the next plan including homework volume, topic order, and how progress will be reviewed.
Questions to Ask a Tutor
- “Which exam board is my child on, and how will you align lessons to that specification?” (What a strong answer sounds like: they confirm board and options, then describe using that board’s past papers and mark schemes, including Pure plus Mechanics/Statistics coverage.)
- “How do you diagnose what’s actually going wrong: content gaps, algebra fluency, or exam technique?” (What a strong answer sounds like: a first-lesson diagnostic using recent papers, then an error log that separates topic knowledge from execution and exam decisions.)
- “How do you teach for method marks (not just final answers)?” (What a strong answer sounds like: training layout, stating methods, showing key steps, and using mark schemes to highlight where marks are awarded.)
- “What will homework look like between sessions, and how will you check it?” (What a strong answer sounds like: set, attempt, review, re-attempt, with a manageable number of questions tied to one objective and checked at the start of the next lesson.)
- “How will you track errors over time?” (What a strong answer sounds like: a shared error log with categories like algebra, notation, method choice, modelling setup, and misreading.)
- “When you mark exam questions, what feedback do you give?” (What a strong answer sounds like: specific notes such as “missing justification line”, “wrong substitution choice”, “domain not stated”, or “time lost expanding unnecessarily”, plus a follow-up question that tests the same skill.)
Red Flags to Watch For
- No diagnostic in the first lesson (they jump straight into teaching a topic you mention). Why this matters: without isolating the root cause, you can pay for explanations that do not shift the blocker.
- They promise grade outcomes or ‘rapid improvements’ without seeing recent work. Why this matters: credible tutors talk about process and evidence, then review progress after a set number of sessions.
- They can’t explain how they’ll handle Mechanics vs Statistics (or dismiss one as ‘easy’). Why this matters: applied modules require modelling, interpretation, and careful setup.
- Sessions are mostly the tutor talking, with little student writing. Why this matters: exam performance depends on your child producing full solutions, so the lesson should generate written work that can be marked and improved.
- Feedback is vague (“you just need to practise more”) and doesn’t identify error patterns. Why this matters: practice only works when it targets a specific weakness.
- They avoid marking to a mark scheme or don’t reference method marks. Why this matters: if teaching is not connected to how marks are awarded, improvements may not translate into better exam scores.
What Good Progress Looks Like in the First Month
- Your child’s solutions become more structured (clear steps, correct notation, stated method). Concrete sign: fewer jumps in working and fewer lost method marks when you compare two marked questions a week apart.
- Repeated mistakes reduce because they’re tracked and revisited. Concrete sign: an error log exists and the tutor sets a same-skill, different-question follow-up to confirm the fix.
- Method selection improves (they choose the right technique faster). Concrete sign: in mixed-topic sets, they stop defaulting to the last-taught method and can justify why they are using substitution, parts, trig identities, or a particular modelling approach.
- Timing improves on short exam sets. Concrete sign: they complete a small cluster of exam questions to time with fewer stalls, and the tutor can explain what caused any time loss (algebra, setup, interpretation).
- Homework completion becomes predictable and targeted. Concrete sign: homework is tied to one or two objectives and is reviewed properly next session.
- Confidence becomes specific, not general. Concrete sign: they can name what they can now do (for example, “I can set up differential equations from modelling questions”) rather than “maths feels better.”
How to make the decision: a simple scoring checklist you can use after the first two lessons
After two lessons, you should have enough evidence to decide whether to continue. Score each area from 0 to 2 based on what you can see in your child’s written work and the tutor’s follow-up. Diagnostic precision: did the tutor identify a small number of priority issues and explain them in plain language? Method-mark teaching: did your child practise writing full solutions and get marked feedback linked to method marks? Exam-board alignment: are they using the right style of questions and the correct module emphasis?
Then score the practice loop: homework design (targeted and manageable), review quality (errors corrected in full), and student output (your child writes more, not just listens more). If you are seeing marked work, an error log, and clearer method choice on at least one topic, that is usually a good sign.
Practical booking notes: online vs in-person, homework expectations, and how often to review progress
Online tutoring works well for A-Level Maths when the tutor uses a proper shared whiteboard or tablet setup and your child is required to write full solutions. Ask how they will see your child’s working in real time: camera on paper, shared document, or digital pen. In-person can be simpler for checking written layout, but the deciding factor is still whether the session produces marked exam-style work and a clear plan.
Many students benefit from weekly sessions, with a short homework set in between that is reviewed at the start of the next lesson. Agree a review point after four sessions: compare early and recent work, check whether repeated errors are shrinking, and confirm the next targets. If you want a clear picture of lesson structure, see A-Level Maths tutoring (what we cover and how lessons work) and how our tutoring works (diagnostic, homework loop, progress reviews).
If you want to trial a structured first session and see whether the approach fits your child, you can book a free introduction.