Shalhevet Closes Everything But High School.

This is a sad news. Yesterday, Shalevet, a nursery through high school, Modern Orthodox school, announced that it was closing everything but its high school. The press release is here.

This is extremely disappointing, but a clear reflection of the economic realities associated with operating a private school. The blunt fact is that it costs a fortune to provide excellent educational programs, and most people do not have a fortune to spend on their children's education. I don't know the specifics regarding Shalhevet's situation, but I can only assume that they did not have enough enrollment to support their institution, and so the Board decided that they would try to go back to their roots, and focus exclusively on high school. It took courage and honesty to face their situation and I commend the Board for its action.

PEJE recently wrote about an article by Jack Wertheimer, a historian at JTS, who recently wrote an interesting article about the high costs of being Jewish, and the apparent indifference of the organized Jewish community in subsidizing the high cost of Jewish life. Wertheimer is an excellent writer. His book on Conservative synagogues and Conservative Jews in America is fascinating reading. In his article, he writes:

In households and communities, the recession has also brought to the fore an “affordability crisis” that has been gathering for decades. At the heart of this crisis is an unyielding reality: above and beyond what Jews expend on the usual necessities and conveniences, it costs a great deal to live an active Jewish life. Growing numbers of families worry that they will not be able to pay the ever-rising bills associated with full participation in Jewish life.

Wertheimer points out that the cost of providing an active Jewish life for children can be staggering:

By far the greatest costs for many families are incurred from Jewish education. A considerable minority of families now enrolls its children in the three most expensive forms of Jewish education: day schools meeting five or even six days a week, usually for seven to 10 hours a day; residential summer camps, which run sessions lasting from three to seven or eight weeks; and extended programs in Israel for a summer, semester, or year.

But Wertheimer also points out that these very programs possess huge value. He writes:

Why do parents spend these sums of money? For the same reason so many American parents expend staggering sums on college tuition: they believe they are getting value for their dollar. Immersive Jewish education may not provide the same kind of material payoff as a college diploma, but it greatly increases the chances of children learning the skills necessary for participation in religious life, living active Jewish lives, and identifying strongly with other Jews. Day-school tuition is the cost many parents believe they must bear if their children are to retain their heritage in a society that exerts enormous assimilatory pressures.

They are right. It takes time and considerable effort to transmit a strong identification with the Jewish religion and people; to nurture a facility in the different registers of the Hebrew language: biblical, rabbinic, and modern; to teach young Jews the classical texts of their civilization; to expose them to Jewish music, dance, and art; and to socialize them to live as Jews—all the while providing a first-rate general education. Ample research has limned the association between the number of “contact hours” young people spend in Jewish educational settings and their later levels of engagement. Simply put, “more” makes a significant difference. It is not hard to find adult alumni of day schools, summer camps, and Israel programs who attest to the formative impact of their experiences. Not surprisingly, many parents committed to Jewish life want their children to enjoy the same benefits.

Wertheimer argues that the government should provide a variety of assistance (and thus he wages into a battle over the separation of religion and government--which is probably why his article was published in Commentary) but also states:

Most federations of Jewish philanthropy have neither the resources nor the will to make affordability a priority, and other types of organizations don’t even pretend to pay attention.

This is the heart of the problem. No one seriously contends that Day Schools are expensive because they are trying to make a profit. The fact is that serious education costs a lot to provide, and unless you have significant critical mass to diffuse the cost, there is no way to avoid a hefty tuition bill. Yet, if major charities decided to support Day School education, to provide real, solid and meaningful sources of funding, then the cost could be spread, and more people could afford it, and more people would attend, which would further diffuse and lower the tuition cost.

Some major organizations have stepped into help. The Jim Joseph Foundation provides millions for financial aid to Day Schools; in fact, Kadima has received sums from the foundation and thus been able to provide desperately needed financial aid to some of its families. Federations in Boston, Phoenix and Chicago have also helped day schools.

In the end, without a concerted effort by the community to make them more affordable, day schools will remain a privilege and not a right. The sad thing, as Wertheimer points out, is that by not supporting investments in Jewish social capital (i.e. efforts that promote adult involvement in Jewish life), major Jewish organizations undermine one of their major principle goals of promoting Jewish life and the Jewish future.