Holocaust and genocide education

While leadership scholars increasingly acknowledge the influence of followers in the leadership process, less attention has been paid to their role in the destructive leadership process. Specifically, the current debate lacks a broad-based understanding of different susceptible follower types that synthesizes related research across academic domains. Expanding on Padilla, Hogan, and Kaiser's (2007) toxic triangle model of destructive leadership, we integrate research and theory across various academic literatures to derive a cohesive taxonomy of vulnerable followers that we call the susceptible circle. We describe the core characteristics of each follower type, drawing on Barbuto's (2000) theory of follower compliance to highlight the psychological processes that motivate each follower to comply with destructive leaders. We then conclude by discussing theoretical and practical implications, as well as avenues for future research.

This research study was conducted by the UCL
Centre for Holocaust Education, an integral part of
UCL’s Institute of Education – currently ranked as the
world’s leading university for education.
It is the world’s largest ever study of its kind,
drawing on the contributions of more than 9,500
students across all years of secondary school in
England (i.e. 11 to 18 year olds). This report presents
analysis of survey responses from 7,952 students
and focus group interviews with 244 students.

The primary aim of the research was to provide a
detailed national portrait of students’ knowledge
and understanding of the Holocaust. The research
also focused on students’ attitudes towards learning
about the Holocaust and their encounters with this
history, both in and outside of school. Ultimately, the
research sought to establish an empirical basis from
which considerations of the most effective ways to
improve teaching and learning about the Holocaust
could be made.

This volume focuses on the impact of the Armenian Genocide on different academic disciplines at the crossroads of the centennial commemorations of the Genocide. Its interdisciplinary nature offers the opportunity to analyze the Genocide from different angles using the lens of several fields of study.

On the centennial of the acts commonly referred to as the Armenian Genocide, academics and professionals from a variety of disciplines discuss the impact of the Genocide in their respective fields. In this volume, they assess why it still remains relevant to discuss the Genocide today, as well as its global ramifications and its equally long-lasting mark. Some contributions make the case for the use of aspects of the Armenian Genocide for comparative studies, in order to study the emergence of patterns between conflicts. Others focus on the impact of the Genocide on their specific fields of study. Tackling this theme from the perspective of history, law, sociology, anthropology, political science, literature, education and media studies, The Armenian Genocide Legacy relies on an interdisciplinary approach to expose the complexity of the genocidal process, while marking the centennial of the Armenian Genocide.

This report for UNESCO reviews the evidence from empirical studies of education about the Holocaust and links it to the desired Millennium Development Goal outcomes related to Global Citizenship Education (GCED).  It can be accessed and shared at the UNESCO link here: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0026/002619/261969e.pdf

This short essay presents an analytical update of how scholars, curators, and stewards are responding to the xenophobic climate and nationalist censorship being generated by the current Polish government under the rule of the right-wing Law and Justice (PiS) party. I focus on two new groundbreaking publications on the involvement of rural Poles and the Catholic Church in carrying out a rural Holocaust in World War II; the POLIN Museum's exhibit boldly representing the March 1968 antisemitic campaign that resulted in the exodus of thirteen thousand Polish Jews; and the activism of two educated, dedicated stewards of Jewish heritage preservation in small-town Poland.

A very extensive overview of the way the Holocaust was taught in French high schools between 1945-1998. The research focuses on the 1998 program which since then has changed several times. The research was conducted at the Yuviler center at the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.

This chapter examines challenges and promising practices of producing and bringing oral and life histories into the history classroom and especially the introduction of testimony and documentary film in the study of violent pasts. It weaves the voices of four educators and partners in a unique ongoing university-community-school participatory research project foregrounding Rwandan Canadian community knowledge production and expectations concerning the study of the 1994 Rwandan Genocide against the Tutsis at the secondary level. We ground discussions of complex ethical challenges within school-based practice, asking what this means for the historian-survivor/co-creator, student as witness and listener, and teacher as pedagogical facilitator.

The aim of the article is to present a historical model (here based on Lodz ghetto model from Radegast Station) as one of the means currently used in museums to transmit knowledge in a modern way. Its purpose is to preserve memories about past events and places associated with them. A historical model is not a museum artifact, but a modern object that tells a particular story. It captures topographical realities of a non-existing or transformed urban space and requires the use of maps, plans and archival photographs etc. This is an attempt to present the way in which a historical model demonstrates how to combine elements of traditional exhibit, document repository and documentation center in Holocaust museum. At the same time, one has to consider whether a reconstruction of the ghetto model does not bring with it moral dilemmas. Do we have the right to recreate a ghetto? Are there any ways and means protecting us from “misreading” the model?

This is the syllabus for the new one-term module I have written for SOAS and just finished teaching this week, ending with Genocide and the Rohingya, Armenians, and other targeted groups. We rotate teaching this, but if I am teaching this again next year, I would appreciate recommendations from colleagues on academia.edu for additions to the readings. It is the most rewarding course I have taught in terms of what I, as the teacher, gained from preparing it. Its changed how I look at the impact history has and should have, reaffirmed the importance of inter-disciplinarity, made clearer just how much global inequalities contributing to violence is even more true today than in the colonial period, and revealed the responsibility of consumers in the hemispheric north in southern suffering.

This module seeks to understand the phenomena and impact of war and collective violence in the non-Western world-to understand how violence emerges from particular historical circumstances and how it produces different consequences in different periods and geographical, cultural, ethnic, and even religious contexts.

Se pretende la doble lectura de la importancia de incorporar el exterminio racial realizado por la Alemania nazi desde la perspectiva de la responsabilidad de la Universidad y desde los retos que implica para el nuevo EEES. Para ello, se propone también una posible metodología de trabajo específicamente dirigida a las Facultades de
Comunicación que combina el ejercicio del análisis fílmico con la reflexión histórica. Los objetivos fundamentales son permitir que el alumno se familiarice con la problemática concreta de su profesión sin despegarse de la importancia del exterminio como hecho definitorio del estado actual de la filosofía y la sociología occidental.

NOTE:  THERE IS A REVISED VERSION OF THIS PAPER THAT WILL BE COMING OUT IN WEEKS AND THAT I WILL POST HERE, DELETING THIS ENTRY. engaging Holocaust survivors primarily as “witnesses” who provide “testimony”—which has long been the prevailing paradigm of practice with survivors—radically oversimplifies both survivors’ lives and their accounts of their lives.  Similarly, the conventional “testimony” model limits the extent to which we are likely become engaged in, and implicated by, survivors’ retelling.  The author has been making those arguments for over forty years.  Here, the focus is primarily on teaching “beyond testimony”: especially through immersion in survivors’ recounting as a deliberate, situated, multiply contingent process in which students themselves become, in a survivors’ phrase, “participants in a conversation.”  In the author’s classroom, collaborative exploration, participation in conversation, replaces “receiving a testimony” as the guiding paradigm.  Students’ responses to such conversations are featured.  One student wrote about a survivor who visited the class: “She was not ‘just’ a survivor, if I can say it that way.  And that made her being a survivor much more significant.  The ‘not-survivor’ part of her—the experiences and traits that are just like us or people we know—is what made the ‘survivor part’ real.  Not a symbol of the Holocaust.  But one of us.”  Engaging individual survivors as “one of us” rather than “symbols of the Holocaust” can transform how we teach about genocide, and the few who live after, even when only memoirs, recordings, and transcripts remain.

This response to Anja Mihr’s article, “Why Holocaust Education Is Not Always Human Rights Education,” argues that despite their differences, Holocaust education and human rights education are more similar than Mihr suggests and face similar challenges. Holocaust education offers numerous opportunities to engage critically in comparative and prospective reflection that relates to human rights. This paper claims that its relevance transcends regional and cultural limitations and that an analytical and comparative approach—tempered with critical reflection on historical context, collective memory, and the implications of its status as a symbol of evil—is preferable to one based on empathy. Likewise, human rights education is incomplete without fostering critical thinking, including acknowledgement of the failures of human rights law and critical attention to the darker side of human rights discourse and logic.

As technology continues to improve and online learning options proliferate throughout the United States, it is necessary for instructors to establish a sound understanding of proper pedagogical techniques for teaching in a digital environment. This phenomenon has ushered in a new era of education, thus bringing forth a myriad of new questions and issues that must be addressed. Social studies educators are faced with additional quandaries, such as teaching democratic processes for effective citizenship and the teaching of controversial topics. This exploration draws upon the scholarship and experience of experts in the field of social studies education, distance learning, and Holocaust studies to provide suggestions as to how teachers should approach controversial topics in a digital learning environment. A sample Holocaust lesson plan is also provided to showcase a successful integration of controversial issues into an online or blended learning high school social studies classroom.

Before designing a national Continuing Professional Development programme for teachers, it was considered imperative to find out more about what was already happening in classrooms across the country and to listen to teachers about their experiences, needs and challenges in teaching about the Holocaust. This landmark study explores when, where, how and why the Holocaust is taught in state-maintained secondary schools in England. Research began in 2008 and was published in 2009. The researchers employed a mixed methodology over two phases. First, quantitative data was gathered via an online survey completed by 2,108 teachers. This survey contained 54 questions and was completed by teachers from a range of subjects and backgrounds. Second, qualitative data was acquired through follow-up interviews with 68 teachers in 24 schools in England.
The research produced wide-ranging findings, relevant to academics, educators, teachers and policy-makers, including:
The Holocaust was taught in all secondary years in several subjects, with most attention in Year 9 History (aged 13 to14).
Teaching time varied considerably, with an average of six hours spent on the subject.
Although some teachers demonstrated detailed specialist knowledge and clear understanding, others had significant gaps in subject knowledge.
Many seemed to draw on popular rather than academic discourse.
Teachers indicated their teaching tended to be dominated by a focus on Auschwitz and the persecution of the 1930s. Scant attention was given, for instance, to pre-war Jewish life, or victims’ perspectives. This reflected and perpetuated perpetrator-orientated narratives found in many textbooks.
85% of teachers believed the Holocaust should be compulsory in the secondary history curriculum, but many struggled to articulate its distinct historical significance.
Many teachers prioritised civic-based (e.g. focused on broad understandings of racism, prejudice, discrimination) over subject-specific teaching aims (e.g. focused on understanding the Holocaust as an historical phenomenon) . There was also uncertainty over how to define the Holocaust, though most indicated they understood the Holocaust to include various victim groups rather than focus on the particular fate of Jewish people.
Very few teachers received specialist professional development. 82.5% considered themselves self-taught and 77.5% wanted CPD.

Educating about and for transitional justice raises numerous questions for educators: At what age and in what depth is it appropriate to discuss human atrocities with young people? How should the topic of transitional justice be approached in the classroom? What cognitive, affective, and behavioural learning outcomes are desired? What pedagogies will best conduce to such learning? How should sensitive issues such as the realities of mass human rights abuses, as well as conflicting identities, narratives, and contestations about the recent past be handled in the classroom? What training and support do transitional justice educators—especially those native to the conflict context—require? And how should transitional justice education ‘success’ be measured? Such questions compel a search for relevant precedents in educational practice that could usefully guide preparation and teaching in the new field of transitional justice education. The chapter brings into focus a number of practical, pedagogical, political, ethical and generational considerations for teachers, curriculum developers and policymakers intending to support transitional justice education initiatives. Six lessons related to the practice of addressing histories of atrocity in the classroom are offered.

Primary documents are frequently used in history courses and in Holocaust education, often to illustrate a point or to tell part of a grand narrative of the past. Here we suggest a more dynamic approach to using primary documents – not so much as part of a narrative or in order to present a particular point of view or to convey a certain message or “lesson", but rather to suggest ways to help students inquire into the past. The aim of student interrogation of the sources is to reveal how differing narratives of the past are constructed; to deepen student understanding of the history of the Holocaust; to add nuance and complexity to their understanding; and to allow students’ own meanings to emerge out of that encounter with the past, rather than using the past to teach pre-determined “lessons”.

Die Reihe "Holocaust Education und Menschenrechtsbildung" verbindet interund transdisziplinär die beiden Ansätze von Holocaust Education und Menschenrechtsbildung, die sowohl im Bereich der Gesellschaftswissenschaften, der Sprachwissenschaften als auch im erziehungswissenschaftlichen Gesamtkontext der Vermittlung von demokratischen Werten in bildungspolitischen Zusammenhängen adressieren. Ausgewiesene Expertinnen und Experten aus verschiedenen Disziplinen, aber auch der wissenschaftliche Nachwuchs präsentieren in dieser Reihe neueste Forschungsergebnisse, theoretische Grundlagen und dokumentieren die aktuelle inter-und transdisziplinäre Diskussion. Die Reihe "Holocaust Education und Menschenrechtsbildung" wendet sich an Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler, die sich mit Fragen der Vermittlung des Holocausts und Fragen der Menschenrechtsbildung beschäftigen, sowie historisch-politische Bildnerinnen und Bildner in Schule und außerschulischen Kontexten.

I presented this paper at the conference called "Near and Far: Holocaust Education Revisited." This conference was held in February 2018 at the University of Munich (LMU Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet Munich). I presented in the session related to didactics and showed how digital posters can be created and used to advance Holocaust education.

in the Mirror. Fictional Transitions and Cinematic Narravatives (Edith Bruck allo specchio. Trasposizioni fizionali e narrazioni filmiche), benché inclusa negli "Shofar Supplements in Jewish Studies" della Purdue University Press, collana espressamente dedicata agli studi sull'ebraismo, rappresenta un articolato lavoro interdisciplinare e multiprospettico sull'opera di un'autrice fra le più interessanti del panorama italiano/italofono contemporaneo, l'italoungherese Edith Bruck. Il merito di Philip Balma-va precisato da subitoconsiste nell'aver saputo infrangere le barriere di approcci critico-settoriali spesso limitanti sul piano ermeneutico (gender studies, studi postcoloniali, studi ebraici, ecc.) per restituire alla produzione letteraria e cinematografica di Edith Bruck una molteplicità di significati finora ignorata da lettori e critici. In questa sua disamina Balma unisce l'indipendenza interpretativa dello studioso, lo scavo effettuato attraverso la strumentazione critica che è propria del filologo, al generoso rispetto per l'ottica dell'autrice, le cui parole vengono registrate in due appendici dal prezioso valore documentario.

The Holocaust is – inescapably – a part of British (and Swedish) history and heritage. Not only in the aspects of the history that these nations have traditionally incorporated into their public memory (as places of refuge during the Nazi era, for example, or as providers of assistance to the survivors in its aftermath), but also in those aspects that are more troubling, and less reflected upon and remembered: what did the ‘outside world’ know and understand of the crimes committed in Nazi-occupied Europe; when was this known, and what more could have been done to prevent these mass atrocity crimes, and to rescue the victims? What does knowledge about the Holocaust mean for our understanding of genocide and can this strengthen our efforts at genocide prevention today?
Fundamentally, while being outside the territories where the killings took place, these countries are inside and part of the broader western tradition from which the Holocaust emerged. The Holocaust was not an aberration from the ‘normal course’ of western history, but rather had its roots in European history, culture and society. This is a tradition that Britain and Sweden have both contributed to and been shaped by for millennia. What does it mean for us that the Holocaust emerged out of our common European society, culture, polity and tradition?

Le Temps des Aveux, or The Gate in English, is a 2014 feature film based on the memoir The Gate (Le Portail) by Frenchman François Bizot. The memoir’s first section details Bizot’s capture by the Khmer Rouge in 1971 and his subsequent incarceration in a jungle prison camp. In the second part ‘the gate’ comes into play. ‘The gate’ is the gate of the French embassy in Phnom Penh where, in 1975, with the invasion of the Khmer Rouge, Bizot became the embassy’s translator and intermediary with the Khmer Rouge. It signifies a barrier, a symbol of protection, and a door between worlds — hence the title of the book. The book is beautifully written, moving and gripping through a combination of the language used and the events that take place. [Online version at https://www.altlj.org/news-and-views/law-and-culture/law-and-culture-vol-41-1/1003-le-temps-des-aveux-the-gate]

The massive scale of the Nazi-persecution of Jews in Europe, resulting in the death of almost six million people, makes it easy to forget that the Holocaust was also an intimate history, taking place around the corner, in the street, on the hallway. As much as it is a story of industrial killing in Auschwitz, of Nazi racial mania, of the power of the state apparatus and its repressive institutions of police and military, of the fanaticism of ethnonationalism and of institutional collaboration in the occupied countries of Europe, it is the story of more mundane civilians and their agency during genocide, of "ordinary" Jewish-Gentile relations and how they developed under the immense pressure of Nazi-rule.

Abstract
This chapter takes up questions of how students in superdiverse contexts make sense of historical accounts articulated by survivor communities of mass atrocity, what tensions can arise between students’ critical structural analysis and their imaginatively engaged deep listening when studying contemporary world history, and the implications for antiracist and anticolonial education. This chapter specifically reports on the findings of one case study within a multi-site community-led participatory research project aimed at expanding the sources and pedagogical approaches used in the study of the 1994 Rwandan Genocide against the Tutsis in the context of a unique Canadian and World Studies course “Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity: Historical and Contemporary Implications”. The project focused on the implications of centring antiracism and anticolonial frameworks and introducing memory studies and methods of oral history in studying histories of mass violence from the perspectives of ‘survivor-historians’ (Rwigema, Karera, Nsabimana, Sharangabo, & Sollange Sauter, 2009; Rwigema, 2018). Analysis of this case study relies upon the collective knowledge creation of the larger project (Taylor, Rwigema, & Umwali, 2012, 2014; Taylor, Rwigema, Sollange & Kyte, 2017).
Analysis of qualitative classroom data and samples of student learning points to several conclusions. Critically framed, oral counter-histories offer tremendous possibilities for critical and emotional literacies, moving from questions of What happened? to those of Why does it matter? To whom? For what social projects? (Llewellyn, 2015). They invite further questions: Which people’s memories are important to listen to and how is one’s access to them filtered through relations of power? How does the meaning of this event change as each generation re-members it differently through the lens of their historical consciousness? How is forgetting organized? What is at stake in remembering? How are collective identities defined and redefined through contemporary practices of remembering the past through oral history? Finally, what kinds of futures are we building through critical remembrance practices?

Conceptualizing Mass Violence draws attention to the conspicuous inability to inhibit mass violence in myriad forms and considers the plausible reasons for doing so. Focusing on postcolonial perspective, the volume seeks to popularize and institutionalize the study of mass violence in South Asia.

Twenty-two eminent scholars from eight countries (Australia, Austria, Chile, India, Israel, Mexico, South Africa, and USA) come together in this book to explore episodes of mass violence from all inhabited continents, from the twentieth century to the present.

The essays explore and deliberate upon the varied aspects of mass violence, namely revisionism, reconstruction, atrocities, trauma, memorialization and literature, the need for Holocaust education, and the criticality of dialogue and reconciliation. The language, content, and characteristics of mass violence/genocide explicitly reinforce its aggressive, transmuting, and multifaceted character and the consequent necessity to understand the same in a nuanced manner. The book is an attempt to do so as it takes episodes of mass violence for case study from all inhabited continents, from the twentieth century to the present. The volume studies ‘consciously enforced mass violence’ through an interdisciplinary approach and suggests that dialogue aimed at reconciliation is perhaps the singular agency via which a solution could be achieved from mass violence in the global context.

This research report has been written under the auspices of the University College London (UCL) Centre for Holocaust Education. The Centre is part of the UCL Institute of Education – currently the world’s leading university for education – and is comprised of a team of researchers and educators from a variety of different disciplinary fields. The Centre works in partnership with the Pears Foundation who, together with the Department for Education, have co-funded its operation since it was first established in 2008. A centrally important principle of all activity based at the UCL Centre for Holocaust Education is that, wherever possible, classroom practice should be informed by academic scholarship and relevant empirical research. In 2009, Centre staff published an extensive national study of secondary school teachers’ experience of and attitudes towards teaching about the Holocaust (Pettigrew et al. 2009). This new report builds on that earlier work by critically examining English s...

Over the last forty years, the Holocaust has become a distinct aspect of Western culture and a universal lesson for protection of minorities and human rights. By contrast, the Armenian genocide is still being denied by Turkey and a culture of commemoration which is lagging far behind. Beyond the reason for differences between memory practices, I argue that a stronger culture of commemoration of the Armenian genocide would have twofold benefits. In the PRIF Report 06/2020, I show how a stronger culture of commemoration is not just a normative expression of the acknowledgement that is a valuable human need for the Armenians, but also would emphasize the universal lesson of the Holocaust -protection of minorities and human rights. In what follows, I will summarize some of the key arguments of the report and present them in the context of the pandemic and other current affairs.