Teaching the Holocaust at the University Level

Abstract

An innovative interdisciplinary course convering a violent event makes students say "we are no longer apathetic."Although historians have amassed huge amounts of data on practically all phases of the Nazi genocide of the Jews, and behavioral scientists have constructed theories of violence from which hypotheses have been derived, tested and in some cases confirmed, the historical and behavioral disciplines have remained relatively isolated from each other. Whether because of different theoretical approaches, different research strategies, or different orientations toward similar data, one result of this type of academic parochialism has been the construction of explanatory models which are either incomplete or in some cases represent distortions of historical facts or misinterpretations of unwarranted extrapolations of behavioral principles and concepts. Yet to understand an event as complex and multi-determined as the Nazi seizure of power which culminated in the holocaust requires a fruitful and creative rapprochement between the social and behavioral sciences. Each discipline has to become aware of how the other proceeds with the collection and interpretation of data and to understand the theoretical guides which determine the kinds of data to be collected.Although University-level courses on the holocaust continue to proliferate, none, as far as we know, is truly interdisciplinary in the sense of involving a mutual interchange between historian and psychologist in the preparation and presentation of lectures within a formal academic setting, where each may challenge the other's points of view, alter personal biases, explore methods for the valid integration of data and theory, and involve our students in the excitement and inevitable frustrations attendant upon interdisciplinary dialogue in an area so fraught with emotion and horror.Our first course, offered during the Spring, 1976 semester and titled: Historical and Psychological Analyses of Genocide, was viewed by us as an experiment in crossdiscipline teaching, the results of which would be used in preparing a second offering of the course for the Spring, 1977 semester. A total of 130 students completed the first course. Most of the declared majors were in Psychology and History with the remainder scattered across 20 additional disciplines. The reasons given for taking the course were varied, and in order of frequency included: interest in the history of National Socialism and the Holocaust, interest in psychological explanations of genocide as practiced under National Socialism, previous information about or experience with either or both instructors, personal reasons, and interest in an interdisciplinary approach to a complex historical event.Curriculum. Two one hour and twenty minute lectures were delivered twice a week with Fridays set aside, on an optional basis, for discussions of required readings and previous lectures, and for the showing of films. Although attendance varied, at least half the class was present every FridayFollowing an introduction...

Teaching Psychology in the Information Age

“…Those faculty who have had such experiences report that they were educational for. themselves as well as for the students, and recommend such activities to others (e.g., Solkoff & Allen, 1978). Interdisciplinary courses connect psychological concepts to a wider body of information, and thus enhance the likelihood that psychological principles will be remembered outside the context of the psychology classroom.…”

Hitler’s Genocide

“…For instance, German control of large numbers of people in Eastern Europe and the identification of the ''enemies'' of the German state combined under the cover of war for the implementation and normalization of mass murder on a scale not previously seen in human history (Bergen, 2009;Lindquist, 2006;Mann, 2005;Petropoulos & Roth, 2005). Therefore, the necessity of the war to the Holocaust must then be reflected in any efforts to teach about the Holocaust, and this factor is largely absent or underemphasized (e.g., students' consideration, narrowed to the period between 1933 and 1945, typically lacks attention to antecedents and legacies) in the few extant interdisciplinary courses on teaching the Holocaust through a psychological lens (Albrecht & Nelson, 2001;Lazar et al, 2009;Solkoff, 2001;Solkoff & Allen, 1978;Woolf, 2001).…”

“…There have been but a few attempts to blend historical and psychological literatures in the teaching of the Holocaust. In one of the first efforts to employ an interdisciplinary approach, Solkoff and Allen (1978) taught the Holocaust focusing on such themes as authoritarian personality analysis, the psychology of violence, analysis of the behavior of camp inmates, and the psychology of survivors. This course was heavy on the Freudian interpretation of perpetrator motives and actions.…”