Abstract
In Switzerland, the Holocaust is not a mandatory subject in primary school. But should teachers teach it when children ask questions about it? Mathis’ study shows that pupils have ideas, particularly about the destruction of the Jews, but they lack ideas about the systematic persecution and murder of people that took place under the structures and mechanisms of the Nazi regime. Mathis reconstructs a Hitler(centr)ism which is, on the one hand, a reason for focusing on the phase of destruction. On the other hand, it rejects the ideas of the structure of the regime and thus the enforcement of its Jewish policy. Mathis concludes in regard to pupils’ prior knowledge that the Holocaust can be taught by focusing on both individual biographies and structures.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The Holocaust is viewed as a ‘hot potato’ for primary teacher students at the University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Northwestern Switzerland (FHNW) and should therefore be steered well clear of. First and foremost the fear of burning their fingers because of parents’ complaints, for example, is great. Second, they fear they are not able to teach the subject in a child-friendly manner and therefore will fail. Only in third place were the anxieties of overwhelming the children emotionally with the subject. This is based on an unsystematic survey of students at the School of Education FHNW in Liestal by Mathis in 2009–2011.
- 2.
Cf. Vera Hanfland, Holocaust – ein Thema für die Grundschule? Eine empirische Untersuchung zum Geschichtsbewusstsein von Viertklässlern (Berlin 2008); Andrea Becher, Die Zeit des Holocaust in Vorstellungen von Grundschulkindern. Eine empirische Untersuchung im Kontext Holocaust Education (Oldenburg 2009); Alexandra Flügel, ‘Kinder können das auch schon mal wissen…’ Nationalsozialismus und Holocaust im Spiegel kindlicher Reflexions- und Kommunikationsprozesse (Opladen/Farmington Hills 2009); Christina Klätte, ‘Frühes historisches Lernen über Nationalsozialismus und Judenverfolgung. Familiäre Bedingungen, Interessen und Wissenserwerb bei Viertklässlern’ in Isabel Enzenbach, Detlef Pech, Christina Klätte (Hrsg.), Kinder und Zeitgeschichte: Jüdische Geschichte und Gegenwart, Nationalsozialismus und Antisemitismus (= 8. Beiheft von widerstreit-sachunterricht.de) (Berlin 2012), pp. 85–99.
- 3.
Already in the 1960s, Ausubel stressed the importance of existing knowledge and knowledge activation as follows: ‘If I had to reduce all educational psychology to just one principle, I would say this: The most important single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows. Ascertain this and teach him accordingly.’ David P. Ausubel, Educational psychology: A cognitive view (New York 1968), VI.
- 4.
Cf. Hilke Günther-Arndt, ‘Historisches Lernen und Wissenserwerb’ in Hilke Günther-Arndt, Meik Zülsdorf-Kersting (Hrsg.), Geschichtsdidaktik. Praxishandbuch für die Sekundarstufe I und II (Berlin 62014), pp. 24–49. Christian Mathis, ‘Irgendwie ist doch da mal jemand geköpft worden’. Didaktische Rekonstruktion der Französischen Revolution und der historischen Kategorie Wandel (Baltmannsweiler 2015).
- 5.
Cf. Wolfgang Schnotz, ‘Conceptual Change’ in Detlef H. Rost (Hrsg.), Handwörterbuch Pädagogische Psychologie (Weinheim 2001), pp. 75–81; Hilke Günther-Arndt, ‘Conceptual Change-Forschung. Eine Aufgabe für die Geschichtsdidaktik?’ in Hilke Günther-Arndt, Michael Sauer (Hrsg.), Geschichtsdidaktik empirisch. Untersuchungen zum historischen Denken und Lernen (Berlin 2006), pp. 251–277; Margarita Limón, ‘Conceptual change in history’, in Margarita Limón, Lucia Mason (Hrsg.), Reconsidering conceptual change. Issue in theory and practice (Dordrecht/Boston/London 2002), pp. 259–289.
- 6.
Peter Gautschi, ‘1. Sektion: Vorstellungen von der Shoa in der Schweiz heute’ in Béatrice Ziegler, Bernhard C. Schär, Peter Gautschi, Claudia Schneider (Hrsg.), Die Schweiz und die Shoa. Von Kontroversen zu neuen Fragen (Zürich 2012), pp. 13–17, p. 14 here (translated by Mathis).
- 7.
The various terms of this subject in Switzerland and their underlying conceptions cf. Markus Kübler, ‘Sachunterricht in der Schweiz – Lehrpläne zwischen Föderalismus und Zentralisierung’, in Markus Peschel, Pascal Favre, Christian Mathis (Hrsg.), saCHen unterriCHten. Beiträge zur Situation der Sachunterrichtsdidaktik in der deutschsprachigen Schweiz (Baltmannsweiler 2013), pp. 21–40.
- 8.
Cf. Dagmar Richter, Sachunterricht – Ziele und Inhalte. Ein Lehr- und Studienbuch zur Didaktik, (Baltmannsweiler 22005), pp. 76–103.
- 9.
Detlef Pech also expresses this position and speaks of an ‘incapacitation process’ when socially important issues such as the Holocaust and National Socialism are withheld from primary school pupils: ‘Holocaust and National Socialism must be subjects taught in General Studies (i.e. Sachunterricht), because they are relevant out of a lifeworld orientation perspective and in regard to Bildung.’ Detlef Pech, ‘unfassbar(,) ungeklärt. Reflexionen über sachunterrichtliche Bedeutungen einer Auseinandersetzung mit dem Holocaust in der Grundschule’, in Detlef Pech, Marcus Rauterberg, Katharina Stoklas (Hrsg.), Möglichkeiten und Relevanz der Auseinandersetzung mit dem Holocaust im Sachunterricht der Grundschule, www.widerstreit-sachunterricht.de, 3. Beiheft, (Frankfurt am Main 2006), p. 58.
- 10.
Cf. Hanfland, Holocaust – ein Thema, p. 9 f.
- 11.
Becher, Die Zeit des Holocaust, p. 34 (translated by Mathis).
- 12.
Cf. Detlef Pech, Andrea Becher, ‘Holocaust Education als Beitrag zur Gesellschaftlichen Bildung in der Grundschule’, in Diethard Cech, Hartmut Giest (Hrsg.) Zwischen Grundlagenforschung und Unterrichtspraxis. Erwartungen an die Didaktik des Sachunterrichts (Bad Heilbrunn 2005), pp. 87–102, p. 90 here; Becher, Die Zeit des Holocaust, p. 36. Flügel’s opinion on the pro–con debate: ‘To what extent developments will take place in the end has much to do with the fact of how primary education and the individual teaching methodology will devote time to the discussion about possibilities and difficulties…and continue further research.’ Flügel, ‘Kinder können das auch schon mal wissen…’, p. 175 (translated by Mathis).
- 13.
Cf. Dietmar von Reeken, ‘Holocaust und Nationalsozialismus als Thema in der Grundschule? Historisch-politisches Lernen im Sachunterricht’, in Dagmar Richter (Hrsg.), Politische Bildung von Anfang an. Demokratie-Lernen in der Grundschule (Bonn 2007), pp. 199–214, p. 211 here.
- 14.
An exception can be seen for example in two BA theses supervised by Christian Mathis at the School of Education FHNW. Cf. Christoph Graf, Remo Sprenger, Schülervorstellungen von Primarschülerinnen und Primarschülern zum Holocaust – Eine empirische Erkundung. Unpublished Bachelor thesis, submitted at the School of Education FHNW (Liestal 2011); Natalie Urech, Holocaust – ein Thema für Schweizer Primarschulen? Chancen und Grenzen. Bachelor thesis, submitted at the School of Education FHNW (Zofingen 2012).
- 15.
The history of the discussion of the pros and cons and this tabular account was taken from the thesis written by Andrea Becher. Cf. Becher, Die Zeit des Holocaust, pp. 32–37, p. 35 here. The table is based on Gertrud Beck, ‘Der Holocaust als Thema für die Grundschule’, in Jürgen Moysich, Matthias Heyl (Hrsg.), Der Holocaust. Ein Thema für Kindergarten und Grundschule? Kongress: Internationale Tagung ‘Der Holocaust – ein Thema für Kindergarten und Grundschule?’ in Hamburg 1997 (Hamburg 1998), pp. 110–119 and Matthias Heyl, ‘Nein, aber… oder: Warum?’, in ibid., pp. 120–141. Reference point of the whole discussion to date is Adorno’s broadcast speech from 1966 with the central statement: ‘The prime demand upon all education is that Auschwitz not occur again’, Theodor W. Adorno, ‘Erziehung nach Auschwitz’, in Theodor W. Adorno, Erziehung zur Mündigkeit. Vorträge und Gespräche mit Hellmut Becker 1959–1969 (Frankfurt am Main 131971), p. 88 (translated by Mathis). Often forgotten here is that Adorno emphasizes in this speech that education, which wants to prevent a recurrence of the Holocaust, has to focus on early childhood. Cf. Ibid., p. 90.
- 16.
For information regarding sample and the research methods see Urech, Holocaust – ein Thema, p. 14. The guideline was inspired by Becher, Die Zeit des Holocausts, p. 104.
- 17.
Cf. Anselm Strauss, Juliet Corbin, Grounded Theory: Grundlagen Qualitativer Sozialforschung (Weinheim 1996), pp. 39–147. Although the results of Andrea Becher were known and gave direction, the principle of openness was paid attention to, so as to remain sensitive to new codes and categories. Cf. Becher, Die Zeit des Holocausts.
- 18.
The results presented here focus on the information relevant for the question of Natalie Urech’s bachelor’s thesis students’ conceptions. Cf. Urech, Holocaust – ein Thema, p. 14. Certain categories are not ‘saturated’. Cf. Anselm L. Strauss, Grundlagen qualitativer Sozialforschung (München 1998), p. 49. Here it is necessary in the sense of ‘theoretical sampling’ collection and evaluation of further interviews see Barney G. Glaser, Anselm L. Strauss, Grounded Theory. Strategien qualitativer Forschung (Bern 2005), pp. 53–83.
- 19.
This has some similarities with Foster et al., What do students know and understand about the Holocaust? Evidence from English secondary schools (London, 2016), pp. 194–198.
- 20.
One possible reason why children know nothing about the deportations could be, for example, that they have no idea of where the Jews were living at that time. The majority of the children were neither aware that the Jews were living in Europe nor that they were identified as Jews, taken away and murdered by deportations, and that only after the war, many of them went to Israel. Some pupils believed that the Jews lived in Israel at that time: ‘Well, I…well I don’t know…well, if you look at the world map, then more in the East’ (Lionel: 54).
- 21.
Cf. Becher, Die Zeit des Holocaust, pp. 205–207 and Foster et al., What do students know, pp. 129.
- 22.
Cf. Becher, Die Zeit des Holocaust, pp. 142–150.
- 23.
The results are roughly consistent with those of Foster et al., What do students know, pp. 46–50, 146–151 and Becher, Die Zeit des Holocaust, pp. 142–150, pp. 196–200 (translated by Mathis). The name of the swastika as ‘Hitler Cross’ illustrates this as a kind of narrative abbreviation (Rüsen).
- 24.
Apart from the murders, the pupils also know the term of confinement. To some extent it shows a concept of National Socialist terror and of totalitarian dictatorship. Von Reeken calls for this to be addressed in primary school classrooms. Cf. von Reeken, ‘Holocaust und Nationalsozialismus’.
- 25.
Cf. Becher, Die Zeit des Holocaust, p. 144.
- 26.
Some children’s perceptions mix up the idea and the objective of a pure race with the existence of one. In this case, Hitler supporters are not only supportive for his racial theory, the idea of a pure race, but they also belong to it, as Lionel’s quote shows: ‘I don’t know what it’s called, but I think there are. I think all had blue eyes and – ehm – had blonde hair./Interviewer: His supporters or all the Germans?/His army I believe’(Cf. Lionel: 51). The term ‘Aryan’ was sporadically dropped in this context (Cf. Micha: 58).
- 27.
Again a great similarity can be seen with Becher’s results. Cf. Becher, Die Zeit des Holocaust, p. 150.
- 28.
Similar findings can be found in the study by Nicole Peters and Nicole Burger on communicative memory respectively on dealing with memories of the Holocaust in intergenerational dialogue. Cf. Nicole Peter, Nicole Burgermeister, ‘The Holocaust and Switzerland: Competing reminders in intergenerational dialogue’, in Béatrice Ziegler, Bernhard C. Schär, Peter Gautschi, Claudia Schneider (Hrsg.), Die Schweiz und die Shoa. Von Kontroversen zu neuen Fragen (Zürich 2012), pp. 19–28.
- 29.
Here, similar ideas are shown like those of Becher, Die Zeit des Holocaust, pp. 175–179.
- 30.
Cf. Foster et al., What do students know, pp. 119–120, 129.
- 31.
No statements can be made on the basis of the interviews regarding the pupils’ concept of ‘race’.
- 32.
Raul Hilberg, Die Vernichtung der europäischen Juden. 3 Bände (Frankfurt am Main 1999), p. 1067. (Translated by Mathis).
- 33.
Cf. Becher, Die Zeit des Holocaust, p. 210 with reference to Hilberg, Die Vernichtung der europäischen Juden, p. 57 and Rainer Zitelmann, ‘Hitler images in Transition’, in Karl Dietrich Bracher, Manfred Funke, Hans-Adolf Jacobsen (Hrsg.), Germany 1933–1945. New studies on the Nazi rule (Bonn 1993), p. 502.
- 34.
This is supported by Foster et al., What do students know, pp. 203–210.
- 35.
See Christian Mathis, Urs Urech, Verfolgt und vertrieben. Lernen mit Lebensgeschichten (Zürich 2018).
- 36.
Also being discussed is a stronger anchoring of Holocaust education in primary teacher studies at the School of Education FHNW by implementation of these teaching materials in (pre-service) teachers’(continuing) professional development courses.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mathis, C. (2018). ‘… They Locked Them Up in Houses and Let Gas in’: Swiss Primary School Pupils’ Conceptions of the Holocaust. In: Szejnmann, CC., Cowan, P., Griffiths, J. (eds) Holocaust Education in Primary Schools in the Twenty-First Century. The Holocaust and its Contexts. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73099-8_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73099-8_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73098-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-73099-8
eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)