Recognizing “Holocaust Fatigue”

In an article for the National Council for Social Studies (NCSS) titled, “’ Holocaust Fatigue’: Teaching it Today,” Simone Schweber discussed her concerns about the state of Holocaust education. Schweber addresses three key issues with the state of Holocaust education, they are as follows: Curriculum Creep caused by “Holocaust Fatigue,” professionalism, and subject sensitivity. As a professional Holocaust educator, Schweber has been in the field for many years and her senses on these topics are keen and I mostly agree with her diagnoses. There is a Curriculum Creep that can erode a student’s interest and empathy over time. If the teacher is not a professional in his or her handling of the classroom, there can be a lost reverence for the topic. Lastly, it is a teacher’s responsibility to convey the information from the coursework, while recognizing that their students come from differing backgrounds which might lead to uncomfortable situations. It is the professional’s job, to overcome these obstacles.

Simone Schweber’s original article: “Holocaust Fatigue: Teaching it Today”

https://www.socialstudies.org/system/files/publications/articles/se_700144.pdf

First, it is important to address the thesis of Schweber’s work; the concept of Curriculum Creep and “Holocaust Fatigue.” Curriculum creep, as Schweber discussed in a different article, “What Happened to Their Pets?” is the phenomenon when a subject matter is overexposed, specifically to targets that are incapable of grasping the concepts that are being taught. Schweber makes the valid point that students in primary school are incapable of identifying with topics like genocide, discrimination, and in many cases, death. It is Schweber’s view that we introduce the Holocaust too early and too often, leading to Curriculum Creep; the topic creeps into multiple subjects like English and various electives, while also being presented at different grade levels. While I disagree with Schweber’s view about the Holocaust being presented in different years and in different subjects, I do agree with her about “Fatigue.” As educators, we are constantly reintroducing topics to students: Fractions, the Roman Empire, Geometry, formulas in physics, and many others are initially introduced as early as 5^th grade. They are then reintroduced between the 6^th and 8^th grades and then again between the 9^th and 12^th grades. Practice and repetition are tried and true methods of instruction that have been proven to be effective. The appropriate usage of interdisciplinary instruction is a vehicle that educators use to reintroduce familiar coursework, which is why I have reservations about Curriculum Creep. However, I do recognize that there is a “Holocaust Fatigue,” that many students experience throughout their time in the education system.

Unlike Math, Physics, and ancient history, the Holocaust is emotionally charged, making it a unique topic; leading to many challenges like diminishing returns on empathy: “Holocaust Fatigue.” As educators, we are given a curriculum that includes diverse topics. We are left to instruct these topics in a comparable way. As an example, Schweber presents an incident that left her feeling uneasy about what was happening in her classroom. Schweber writes,

This past semester, one group of students led a Jeopardy game show to review information. The student leaders tossed out mini-Snickers bars to reward their peers for the right answers. Thus, in response to the 100-point answer, ‘The name of the gas used to asphyxiate victims at Auschwitz,’ the two teams vied to be the first to ask. ‘What is Zyklon B1.’ The juxtapositions were excruciating to me-the game show, the candy, and Auschwitz; worse than a bad joke, the combination seemed to me an obvious example of Holocaust trivialization, and I felt embarrassed to have it occurring in my classroom.

(Schweber, 48).

Like Schweber, I am uncomfortable with this method of instruction being used for the Holocaust. Conversely, the Jeopardy game being used as a tool for reviewing coursework is quite common. If it is ok to make a game out of Genghis Khan killing 10% of the planet’s population, then why not the Nazis killing 6 million Jews? If it is ok to give prizes to students for answering correctly when they give the correct answer to what method the Romans used to execute people, then why is it wrong when the question is to name the gas used to asphyxiate victims at Auschwitz? Both are methods of execution, however, we can all recognize that there is something different about these examples. If the Holocaust were like any other subject, there would be no difference and we could use the same methods of instruction, but that is not the case, because the Holocaust is a unique topic that requires a level of sensitivity and professionalism. Frankly, we need educators with specialized skills for teaching the Holocaust.

Second, professionalism has many costs. The first and most obvious is in salary. A specialist makes more than a generalist. That is the case in every field, education should be no different. If we want our students to learn complex subjects, we will need educators capable of instructing such lessons. That requires advanced degrees and specialized training, all of which cost money. Aside from money, these professionals need to have the authority to instruct their subjects with autonomy. They cannot be handed their lessons from people who are not specialists, for reasons that should be apparent. If the specialized professional is left to instruct his or her class in the way that is required for the students to obtain mastery of the material, there would not be such a need to have the coursework repeated in as many grade levels. That is one of two potential solutions to Curriculum Creep. The second solution would be to have a second class dedicated to the instruction of Genocide Studies. This way, the students can use what they learned from their Holocaust instruction in a kinesthetic way; in the same way, we have students use their talents in Math to solve different problems, we could have the students use their knowledge of the Holocaust regarding genocide. Without this pairing, the learner would be left adrift without the remedial knowledge to obtain mastery. Our goal as educators is to develop our student’s mastery of the subject.

Third, sensitivity is not a trivial matter. With Holocaust education, an instructor may find themselves in a classroom with Jewish and German students. It is important for the professional to address the issues of race, religion, and history with care. That is why educators need to teach about the victims, the perpetrators, the history of antisemitism, examples of other genocides and atrocities, propaganda, and many other issues to better contextualize the history of the Holocaust. For that reason alone, the Holocaust cannot be taught in one semester or academic year. Without an appropriate curriculum that spans differing grade levels; taught by professionals who specialize in Holocaust and Genocide Studies; with sensitivity for the students and coursework, there will be Curriculum Creep and that will cause “Holocaust Fatigue.” Schweber illustrates these consequences when she shared a response that she heard from a student: “It was our fault for killing the Jews, but it was their fault for killing Jesus.” (Schweber, 52). For a student to hold such a position at a college level is a sign that they have either had enough of the subject, they are antisemitic, or they have been subjected to ineffective instruction. I suspect a bit of all three.

Aside from Schweber’s focus on the curriculum, I believe that we need to focus more heavily on the perpetrators that commit atrocities like those seen in the Holocaust and other genocides. This is also why we need to teach about other genocides! The idea that the Nazis were evil is a bad mode of thinking because it means that what they did was bizarre. Unfortunately, it is all too common. The recognition that the Nazis were human and that we are also human is a difficult concept that even I have issues with. It would be so nice to say that they were monsters because then we can just move on. However, we need to understand that what happened in Europe between 1933-1945 lies dormant in all of us. It is one of many rationales that we must hold when teaching the Holocaust. Edmund Burke said it best, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” That is why Holocaust educators have taken on the responsibility of instructing such sensitive and difficult issues. The people who live in Western countries will not be able to feign ignorance should genocide occur once again. A lack of education is no excuse for that kind of barbarism.

Bibliography

Schweber, Simone. “‘Holocaust Fatigue’ in Teaching Today.” www.socialstudies.org/, 2006. https://www.socialstudies.org/system/files/publications/articles/se_700144.pdf.

Schweber, Simone. (2008). “What Happened to Their Pets?”: Third Graders Encounter the Holocaust. Teachers College Record. 110. 10.1177/016146810811001001.