A question of continuity, not just cost

As another school year begins, many Jewish families across Australia feel a familiar tension: gratitude for the availability of Jewish day school education, and anxiety about what it now costs to access it.

For most of us, sending our children to a Jewish school is not merely a lifestyle preference. It is about ensuring that our traditions, values and connection to community are not lost across generations. Yet year after year, Jewish school fees continue to rise, pushing Jewish education further out of reach for a growing number of families. This issue has been discussed many times within the community, including by respected voices who have warned that affordability cannot be ignored indefinitely. The concern is no longer theoretical, it is structural.

What is particularly worrying is that the debate often remains focused on the immediate present. Families understandably think about their own children and their own financial pressures. Others look only a few years ahead. Far fewer are prepared to seriously consider what Jewish education in Australia will look like in 20, 30, or 40 years.

I am not an academic, nor do I claim to have the answers. But I care deeply about the future of our community and Jewish education, not only for today’s children, but for my grandchildren and great-grandchildren. Jewish education should not become something that is financially inaccessible. It should remain a viable and realistic pathway for families who value it.

In practice, many families rely on substantial financial assistance from grandparents or extended family to bridge the growing gap between household income and Jewish school fees. Whether formally acknowledged or not, this intergenerational support has become a critical pillar of the current system, sometimes partial, sometimes decisive. While this model has enabled many families to remain within Jewish education, it raises serious questions about long-term sustainability as demographics, family structures and wealth patterns change.

The uncomfortable question is this: what happens when that support is no longer available or no longer sufficient?

Another point that often arises in discussions is the question of lifestyle and choice. Many families today allocate their income across a range of priorities, including travel, experiences and other aspects of modern life. That is a personal decision, and not one that should be judged. But families should not feel forced to choose between maintaining a reasonable lifestyle and providing their children with a Jewish education. Access to Jewish schooling should not depend on an expectation of disproportionate sacrifice. While there will always be limits, we should be aiming for a system where families who value Jewish education can realistically afford it without needing to opt out of balanced, everyday living.

Some argue that the current structure must be preserved because diversity of schools, ideologies and communities matters. That argument has merit. Across Australia, Jewish schools each have proud histories, loyal alumni, generous benefactors and deeply committed staff. That legacy deserves respect and should not be dismissed lightly.

But legacy alone cannot sustain a system if enrolments soften, costs continue to rise, and fees push families away. A model that relies on multiple schools all operating at the upper end of the private-school fee spectrum risks becoming exclusionary by default.

If we are honest with ourselves, the danger is not only rising fees. It is fragmentation: too few students spread across too many campuses, duplicated administration and infrastructure, and constant upward pressure on costs. Over time, that path leads not to strength, but to fragility. It also risks creating a system where schools are competing for a shrinking pool of students rather than working collectively to support the broader community.

This does not mean there is a single solution, nor that change must be abrupt. But it does mean that serious planning can no longer be deferred. There is a wide range of options short of doing nothing: shared services, shared facilities, coordinated transport, joint senior programs, and deeper collaboration across schools. These are not radical ideas, they are pragmatic ones that could preserve quality while improving accessibility.

Ultimately, the question is not about preserving egos, institutional pride, or past philanthropy, as important and appreciated as those contributions are. The question is whether we are willing to prioritise access for future generations of Jewish children across Australia. That may require difficult conversations, compromise and a willingness to think beyond individual institutions.

This conversation may be uncomfortable, but it is necessary. Jewish education in Australia should remain a realistic option for ordinary Jewish families, not a privilege for fewer and fewer. The time for acknowledging the problem has passed. The time for planning, thoughtfully, collaboratively, and courageously, is now.

Josh S is a member of the Melbourne Jewish community.