Is it possible to lower the costs of Jewish day school education? Over the last two decades, many suggestions have been put forward. Some have focused on increased fundraising via annual campaigns, building endowments, government subsidies, federation support, interest-free loans and even life insurance policies. Other suggestions have focused on using educational technology and differentiated learning models to increase class sizes, or scaling back to a no-frills model. 

While these options merit serious consideration, they largely assume that the operational costs of running a school cannot be changed while still providing the same service. They certainly assume there are no existing redundancies in spending. But what if we have overlooked a significant redundancy because it is not accounted for in any single school budget? Instead, it is a broad philanthropic redundancy, one where our communities are paying for the same service twice. 

Alexey Yaremenko/Getty Images

I am suggesting this is what we do when we fund expansive informal Jewish learning programs like NCSY and Bnei Akiva and also devote a good amount of individual school funding to provide largely the same services at school. Consolidating this spending will allow us to lower the costs of Jewish education while creating greater efficiency, more effective curricular goal-setting and better targeted educational opportunities. 

To make this case, let’s examine the structure of a typical Modern Orthodox high school program, one where roughly half the schedule is devoted to Judaic studies and the other half to general studies. 

The school day typically runs for 9 to 10 hours, with the large majority of that time devoted to classroom learning. What is the goal for time spent in Judaic studies classes? If we’re being honest, this question does not typically have a straightforward answer. Some Judaic studies classes are academic in nature, with identified learning goals, clear benchmarking and formal evaluations of knowledge and skill. These might include text-based classes designed to improve students’ Judaic literacy, independent thinking and textual reading skills. But other classes are nothing of the sort. They reflect more of an informal learning environment without clear academic goals or defined metrics. This informal Jewish learning seeks to promote “buy-in” to a Jewish lifestyle such that young people feel a sense of identity and belonging to Jewish communal and cultural living as they emerge into adulthood. Teachers of this latter group are often selected not for their ability to build student skills, but because they are inspirational, friendly and will form strong bonds as role models for their students. High marks are given out broadly and students feel this is a relaxed or “chill” environment without the pressure to perform academically that they feel in many other classes. 

It’s often the case that the same educators who staff these classes are also hired to lead well-funded informal Jewish learning activities like Shabbatons and other Jewish focused extracurricular programs. This all makes sense too. It’s unreasonable to have a full slate of academic classes daily from 8 a.m. to 5 or 6 p.m. Time in Jewish school should be about more than just formal Jewish learning. It should “connect, inspire and empower Jewish teens and encourage passionate Judaism through Torah and Tradition.”

That last sentence is exactly the mission statement of NCSY, a well-funded organization dedicated to informal education for middle and high school students. If it sounds like Jewish schools are doing the same thing as NSCY — it’s because they are. The same could be said for Bnei Akiva, which seeks to offer informal religious Zionist learning experiences for young people. I believe this reveals a redundancy in funding and an inefficient allocation of philanthropic resources. If we are already funding organizations that specialize in providing informal Jewish educational programs for teens, why are we also paying for schools to provide this service as part of our tuition? 

This also raises a fundamental question: Is the traditional school setting, with its desks, periods, bells, assessments and report cards, the best environment for conducting informal Jewish education? A more physically flexible, open-ended and non-evaluative setting should more effectively model a community optimally suited to programs and activities that foster a Jewish lifestyle goal. 

In light of this, I am suggesting we move to end the traditional school day — the formal learning part of it — at around 2 p.m. by running only half the typical Judaic studies schedule and thereby removing the associated costs of running those classes and concurrent programs. Formal Judaic studies classes should focus on Jewish literacy, skill-building and academic growth within each school’s curricular mandate. If we assume our typical high school has 600 students, operates six Judaic studies classes per week and teachers cost the school $15,000 per class on average (including salary and benefits), we already have a savings of close to $2 million before even factoring in any administrative savings on programs. This would represent about $3000 in savings per student. [This calculation is done using a typical middle and high school structure where the day is divided into learning periods. I assume a “class” meets 3 periods per week and the school runs 36 total periods of learning per week. 18 of the 36 periods are designated for Judaic studies. In this suggestion the school cuts 9 periods from Judaic studies, representing 3 classes cut from the weekly schedule. Assuming $15,000 per class, an average class size of 15 students and a total student body of 600, I calculate the saving as follows: (600/15) x 9 = 360 total periods; 360 / 3 = 120 total classes; 120 x 15,000 = 1,800,000 in savings.]

This obviously does not mean that schools should abandon the critical role that informal Jewish learning plays. On the contrary, once the day of formal learning is over, schools could invite organizations like NCSY and Bnei Akiva into their buildings to run required extended informal learning programs for students. Students can learn in relaxed and friendly environments without tests and report cards, cultivating and expressing talents beyond what is possible in a classroom setting. Educators in these settings are optimally positioned to serve as meaningful role models of Jewish living. 

And this doesn’t need to be the only option available to students. Undoubtedly, some students will want to continue their academic Jewish learning and push beyond the basic curriculum. These students will also be better served as they can now join an after-school beit midrash (study hall) program for additional hours of learning with like-minded peers as opposed to sitting in less academic classes with many who don’t want to be there. This beit midrash style learning is also a better preparation for the type of advanced Jewish learning they might consider pursuing after high school. 

To be fair, none of these informal learning programs would be free to run. But organizations like NCSY and Bnei Akiva already have considerable resources, staffing and expertise to run these programs. It is far more cost effective for these organizations to scale up their existing operations than it is to pay teachers on salary scales designed for formal learning in classrooms limited to 15–20 students. Once you remove the professional requirements to run formal learning classrooms, it becomes far easier to achieve economies of scale — that is, to serve more students at a lower cost. 

This change will also enable schools to be clear and intentional about the goals we have for our children’s Jewish learning in order to apply the optimal settings and times of day to accomplish those goals.

As I mentioned, our goals are divided between two projects that often feel unnaturally merged into one program. On the one hand, we have a desire for our children to build the academic knowledge and skills needed to be lifelong independent Jewish learners and informed ritual practitioners. On the other hand, we also want them to be excited and eager to engage with their Judaism communally and culturally, and to see Judaism as more than an academic skill set to be mastered. For now we mix those two goals within one Judaic studies curriculum, constantly borrowing from one to feed the other without an intentional balance. For example, students with weaker academic profiles are often placed in all informal style classes and remain functionally illiterate in key areas of Jewish knowledge. Also, our school days drag on well beyond when adolescents have the capacities for optimal academic learning. The realities of scheduling often means that students end up struggling through an advanced math class late in the afternoon.

In addition to the savings and refined goal setting, this change will expand student options based on individual learning and hashkafic (Jewish worldview) preferences since students can now select the after-school program provider that best suits their values. For example, students who want an immersive Hebrew language experience might ask Bnei Akiva to run their after-school programs entirely in Hebrew (which could also address the current failure of Hebrew language learning). Another group of students might want the style of warm connection and relatable role models that NCSY provides. Yet another group will choose the aforementioned afternoon seder (learning session) in Gemara or Tanach. We already know that increasing student autonomy in learning has been demonstrated to improve learning outcomes. This would be a major positive step in that direction.

In summary, I am suggesting that Jewish schools would benefit from scaling back their traditional Judaic studies programs, ending the day of formal learning at school earlier and inviting existing third-party providers to run informal Jewish learning programs each afternoon. I believe this will have the following positive impacts: 

First and foremost, it will enable schools to meaningfully lower cost while eliminating an existing redundancy in communal philanthropic giving. Second, it will allow schools to be clear and intentional about which Judaic studies programs are primarily focused on academic goals and which on lifestyle goals. Finally, it will increase student autonomy in their Jewish learning, supporting more diverse options to better engage students where their interests are. 

If this idea seems risky and untested, it is structurally very similar to the after school chug (club) culture that exists in Israel. And while the substance of a North American version would undoubtedly be different, just as the culture and costs of Jewish education here are, it is a structure that has already shown it can yield certain cost-effective benefits.

Specialization is the fuel of economic efficiency. It is more efficient for schools to focus on what they were designed for, that is, academic learning in formal and measured settings. Likewise, other organizations that are designed and funded for informal Jewish learning should specialize in providing their services to schools instead of in addition to schools. 

Hillel David Rapp is the principal of Bnei Akiva Schools of Toronto. He writes frequently about Jewish education at JED Notebook.