What If We Trusted Teachers? New Guidelines for Holocaust and Genocide Education.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: What If We Trusted Teachers? New Guidelines for Holocaust and Genocide Education.
Authors: Resenly, Irene Ann (AUTHOR), Dalbo, George D. (AUTHOR)
Source: Social Studies. May/Jun2026, Vol. 117 Issue 3, p132-142. 11p.
Subjects: Student-centered learning, Critical pedagogy, Educators, Teacher organizations, Teaching methods, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Interdisciplinary education
Abstract: This paper presents new guidelines (framed as reflective questions) for teaching and learning about the Holocaust and genocide in elementary, middle, secondary, and post-secondary classrooms. Since they were drafted in 1993, the United States Memorial Museums' "Guidelines for Teaching About the Holocaust" have become ubiquitous in Holocaust education, shaping how schools and universities have taught about the Holocaust in the United States over the past thirty years. Less a curriculum and more a set of pedagogical recommendations, USHMM's guidelines are rooted in a Holocaust-uniqueness paradigm and center individual Jewish victims' experiences (leaving out larger systems or other narratives). Additionally, they fail to recognize the needs and voices of student learners, minimize teacher agency and capacity, and oppose drawing connections between the Holocaust and other genocides. Despite major shifts in the fields of Holocaust/genocide studies and education toward critical, student-centered learning, Holocaust education has changed little over the previous 30 years. Drawing on their classroom teaching experience and professional development work with pre-service and practicing teachers, and based on shifts in the fields of Holocaust and genocide studies and social studies education, the coauthors advance a new paradigm in Holocaust and genocide education; namely, student and teacher-centered, critical, and expansive approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Social Studies is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Description
Abstract:This paper presents new guidelines (framed as reflective questions) for teaching and learning about the Holocaust and genocide in elementary, middle, secondary, and post-secondary classrooms. Since they were drafted in 1993, the United States Memorial Museums' "Guidelines for Teaching About the Holocaust" have become ubiquitous in Holocaust education, shaping how schools and universities have taught about the Holocaust in the United States over the past thirty years. Less a curriculum and more a set of pedagogical recommendations, USHMM's guidelines are rooted in a Holocaust-uniqueness paradigm and center individual Jewish victims' experiences (leaving out larger systems or other narratives). Additionally, they fail to recognize the needs and voices of student learners, minimize teacher agency and capacity, and oppose drawing connections between the Holocaust and other genocides. Despite major shifts in the fields of Holocaust/genocide studies and education toward critical, student-centered learning, Holocaust education has changed little over the previous 30 years. Drawing on their classroom teaching experience and professional development work with pre-service and practicing teachers, and based on shifts in the fields of Holocaust and genocide studies and social studies education, the coauthors advance a new paradigm in Holocaust and genocide education; namely, student and teacher-centered, critical, and expansive approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:00377996
DOI:10.1080/00377996.2025.2500745