Hi mumteacher, to clarify when I said tutored I was talking about specifically paying someone externally to train 3 year olds specifically for assessments.
If you call tutoring, normal everyday things you do with a child who is inquisitive or willing to learn, reading stories, looking at books, an inquisitive child will ask what letter that is, or what number that is or how many sweets do I have etc, or what is that animal called, or please can I have a pencil I want to do drawing.
Maybe we should agree to disagree but I think tutoring a 3 year old is absolute madness, a much older child who was struggling with fractions is a different scenario (in the first instance I would expect the school teachers to help, then if that failed maybe I would try and help if I could work it out!) but if, and let's use your example, a 3 year old is struggling with these tasks, is this going to be the right school for them anyway at that age??
They have safety scissors and glue and things to cut with at her nursery, we have none at home, excuse my naïveté but don't most nurseries have that? Re drawing, yes my dd draws ok, she is interested in it, by the same token, my older son never was and I never made him sit down to draw, nor did the nursery.
To answer your last point, my concern is that tutors, in RL and on mumsnet, are perpetuating the myth that you have to tutor (pay externally) to pass the 4+ and it's in all your interests to do that. You select your candidates, who knows how many would have got in regardless, the fact that those parents who contact you in the first place are obviously committed enough to their children's education to think of spending money on private education and doing whatever it takes to get in so they are halfway there. The whole tutoring at 3 feels like a bit of scaremongering to be honest.