Smotrich Proposes Radical Shift to Protect Wartime Education
In a letter to Education Minister Yoav Kisch, Smotrich suggested moving part of the long summer vacation forward to the coming weeks, effectively turning the current period into an early break. Lost classroom time would then be made up during the summer months.
Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich is proposing a reshuffle of Israel’s school calendar if the war continues past Passover, arguing that the current reliance on remote learning is failing both students and parents.
In a letter to Education Minister Yoav Kisch, Smotrich suggested moving part of the long summer vacation forward to the coming weeks, effectively turning the current period into an early break. Lost classroom time would then be made up during the summer months.
The logic is blunt: if kids aren’t really learning now, stop pretending they are and deal with it later.
Smotrich sharply criticized the current system of Zoom-based schooling, saying it “does not produce meaningful outcomes.” He argued that remote learning, especially for younger students, is largely ineffective and places an unreasonable burden on families trying to juggle work, childcare, and wartime disruptions.
He also framed the issue as an economic one, not just educational. Keeping children at home under a weak remote-learning model, he said, prevents many parents from returning to consistent work schedules, adding strain to an already pressured economy.
“There is no justification,” Smotrich wrote, “for maintaining a framework which does not deliver educational value while at the same time preventing parents from returning to work.”
The proposal reflects a growing frustration with the stopgap solutions adopted since the escalation of the war. While remote learning allowed the education system to continue operating on paper, in practice it has exposed gaps, particularly for younger children who require supervision and structured environments.
Shifting vacation time is not a new idea, but implementing it mid-conflict is another story. Any change would require coordination across schools, teachers’ unions, parents, and local authorities, all while operating under security constraints that could shift again within days.
There is also the small matter of summer itself. Extending the school year into the hottest months, especially in a country where many schools are not exactly designed for peak heat, is unlikely to be universally embraced. Parents who rely on summer schedules, camps, or childcare frameworks may also find the change disruptive.
Still, Smotrich’s proposal is less about perfection and more about damage control. The current setup, in his view, manages to combine the worst of both worlds: limited educational value and maximum disruption to daily life.
By contrast, a clean break now followed by a structured return later could at least provide clarity, even if it comes at the cost of a shortened summer.
The decision ultimately rests with the Education Ministry, which has so far maintained remote learning as the default under current security conditions. Officials are also weighing broader considerations, including equity gaps, access to technology, and the psychological impact on students.
Smotrich’s intervention signals that the debate is widening beyond education policy into economic and social priorities. The question is no longer just how to keep schools running during wartime, but whether it makes sense to keep them running in their current form at all.