Teaching in the contemporary context

Moderator: Ms. Annegret Ehmann

Presenters:
Prof. Dan Bar-On
Dr Carol Rittner
Ms. Myra Osrin
Mr. Stephen Feinberg
Prof. András Kovác
Mrs. Ilya Altman

Summary:
In the work shop six perspectives from various countries and different cultural backgrounds vere presented. The different approaches presented indicated that different national perspectives are necessary in the teaching about the Nazi Era and the Holocaust in the contemporary context.

Prof. Dan Bar-On, David Lopatie Chair of Post-Holocaust Psychological Studies, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Israel:

Prof. Bar-On is teaching about the Holocaust from a psychology point of view in a contemporary Israeli context. Working through with students (Israeli/German/Jewish-Palestinian etc)  with processes for understanding and integrating knowledge in a very personal experience. In Israel there is a need to redefine the relationship to the Holocaust by identifying the issues relevant in the contemporary political context. The process is the main thing. The Holocaust has changed its meaning in Israel over the years. A middle way between two extreme positions in acknowledging the relevance of the Holocaust, no relevance att all or total relevance for the current life. By finding a middle way, student should be able to become open to traumas of other people.

Dr Carol Rittner, Richard Stockton College, New Jersey, USA:
Rittner is not so optimistic what education can do to help people to become better human beings. Education should serve to make children more human, but the question is whether this can be realised by an educational system that is linked to national economic intrests and qualifiation for speciallysed professions. For exemple academically trained people became perpetrators and participated in genocidal policy  in nazi Germany. There is a need for an education in wich there is a constant emphasis on critical thinking and imagination as well as an approach to knowledge and truth.

Myra Osrin, director, Cape Town Holocaust Centre, South Africa:
The newley opened (August 1999) Cape Town Holocaust Centre has helped people in South Africa to understand the process of racism and prejudice. In South Africa black people have thought that only black people had been discriminated against and persecuted. For many the Centre has been the first insight into a perspective that white people have also been persecuted. It is Osrin’s opinion that museums can change behavioral attitudes. The Centre has had a lot of attention and fits well into the new curriculum in South Africa of an education for prejudice reductions and tolerance of diversity.

Mr Stephen Feinberg, US Holocaust Memorial Museum, USA:
In USA the responsibility of the pedagogical work of the public schools is descentralised and the responsibility of the states. Therefore there is a varied approach to the teaching of the Holocaust in american schools. Commercial text books, independent organisations create courses of study on the Holocaust and develop models for teaching about the Holocaust. Museums and memorials have in some extent helped in the creation of pedagogical standards.

Prof. András Kovác, Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary:
Kovác presented a representative survey that showed a diffrences in opinion between jews and non-jews in late 20th century Hungary. He reported of the results of the empirical research about the knowledg on the holocaust among the Hungarian Jewish and non-Jewish population. The survey brought up cultural differences, the biografical context, everyday context and their personal attitudes to historical facts. The common opinion was that the Holocaust should be part of the national history. But there were differencies in the question of compensation and with regard to remembering.

Kovác also stressed the importance of different biografical perspectives when teaching about the holocaust and that it should be embedded in the question about personal responibilities under the conditions of totalitarianism. Teaching about the Holocaust should be in the context of enlightment and modernity. Modern civilazation bears the seed of its barbarism. Knowledge is not sufficient for behavioural changes.

Director Ilya Altman, Museum of the Holocaust, Moscow, Russia:
There is a need of a new pedagogical paradigm in the teaching of the Holocaust in Russia today. A pedagogy of tolerance and of experiences in democracy is needed. It is necessary to show throug the lessons of the Holocaust in Russia that in historical and psychologucal terms the Holocaust is a symptom of a lethal social diseace of dehumanisation.

Around 3 000 000 of the 6 000 000 victims of the Holocaust were Sovjet Jews, therefore it is necessary to educate Russian of today about the Holocaust and the inadequate reaction of the Sovjet government.

Conclusion:
A uniform curriculum for all countries about the Holocaust is not advisable. Different national perspectives have to be defined and disscussed in an international dialouge between educators and researchers. The Holocaust has to be contextulised, put into a broader historical context and socio-cultural context. It also has to include the other victims of nazi racist policy and genocide. A multilateral discussion on the roots of the genocidal policy in modern civilaziation is necessary for understanding. Teaching and learning on the Nazi Era and the Holocaust has to be based on solid historical facts.

There was also a considerble doubt that teaching about the Holocaust would lead students to become active democrats and humans. There are no empirical studies of long lasting effects of Holocaust education, that allow the conclusion that decisive changes of attitudes and opinions are achieved ie that the students are sensitized against racism and for democratic and human values. These educational goals have to be indispensable and basic for education in general from the very beginning of the socialization process of future generations.

Marcus Björkman, rapporteur