8th Graders To Give Argument Against Holocaust Happening

[Debater Slayer]

That's a good comparison, but I find that actual science v creationism debates help
the situation. This I hear from some who switched to the science side.
As I mentioned earlier, teaching about the evolution controversy is worth doing,
but creationism (like Holocaust denial) should not be treated as factual.
But it's good fodder for debate.

What I gathered from the situation in question was that the students were basically asked to treat the Holocaust as a subject of debate from the get-go, though, without having a solid background on the facts about it and the scholarly consensus that it is a historical fact. In my view, this opens the door to legitimizing denial of the genocide of several million people. I think such possibility outweighs any benefits that might come from picking the Holocaust as the subject of the essay.

 

[Revoltingest]

What I gathered from the situation in question was that the students were basically asked to treat the Holocaust as a subject of debate from the get-go, though, without having a solid background on the facts about it and the scholarly consensus that it is a historical fact. In my view, this opens the door to legitimizing denial of the genocide of several million people. I think such possibility outweighs any benefits that might come from picking the Holocaust as the subject of the essay.

How would you feel if they had a solid background before debating the issue?

 

[Falvlun]

What I gathered from the situation in question was that the students were basically asked to treat the Holocaust as a subject of debate from the get-go, though, without having a solid background on the facts about it and the scholarly consensus that it is a historical fact. In my view, this opens the door to legitimizing denial of the genocide of several million people. I think such possibility outweighs any benefits that might come from picking the Holocaust as the subject of the essay.

Clear, concise summary. I like it!

 

[Alceste]

What I gathered from the situation in question was that the students were basically asked to treat the Holocaust as a subject of debate from the get-go, though, without having a solid background on the facts about it and the scholarly consensus that it is a historical fact. In my view, this opens the door to legitimizing denial of the genocide of several million people. I think such possibility outweighs any benefits that might come from picking the Holocaust as the subject of the essay.

I agree. Debate is a valuable skill to learn, but we should be teaching it by pitting two credible but opposing opinions against one another, not by pitting complete nonsense against well documented facts.

 

[Debater Slayer]

How would you feel if they had a solid background before debating the issue?

I would think that would be the necessary requirement to introduce them to the issue, although I feel that 15-year-olds are a tad too young to be presented with an issue of as much gravity and sensitivity as the Holocaust for debate. Ideally, I think such a discussion would be best reserved for college students who are interested in exploring the issue in depth.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

You're assuming this exercise was an effort to teach it. I'm assuming it wasn't. I don't think we can know which assumption is correct without more information on what unit this exercise fits into and what it's teaching objectives are, but the question is certainly framed in a way that suggests to me that the students can succeed by defending holocaust denial. Substitute creationism or anti-vaccination, or the moon landing hoax idea or any other ludicrous theory. Do we really want to be inviting kids to DEFEND those ideas in the classroom?

So, if this is part of a unit on crackpot theories, neo-Nazi beliefs, denialism of well evidenced facts or propaganda, I agree with you. If it is part of a unit on WWII history, I don't.

Here are a couple of clips from the following article (Rialto Assignment Asking Students to Question Holocaust to Be Revised | KTLA 5) which actually addresses this issue in more detail than other articles I've found. This would strongly indicate, to me, that my impression was correct, and even though the assignment may have been politically/socially ill-advised, the intent was to expose students to critical thinking in regards to a subject which isn't up for debate.

The ADL posted a statement, including the quotes from Friedman, on its blog on Monday.
“ADL does not have any evidence that the assignment was given as part of a larger, insidious, agenda,” the blog post read. “Rather, the district seems to have given the assignment with an intent, although misguided, to meet Common Core standards relating to critical learning skills.”

The school district initially defended the assignment, with Jafri saying it was meant to engage students in “critical thinking.”

The district’s “CORE team” planned meet to revise the assignment, Jafri said in her statement provided to KTLA on Monday.

“This was a mistake. It should be corrected. It will be corrected,” Jafri said in an interview. “We all know it was real. The Holocaust is not a hoax. … I believe our classroom teachers are teaching it with sensitivity and compassion.”​

​

 

[Alceste]

Here are a couple of clips from the following article (Rialto Assignment Asking Students to Question Holocaust to Be Revised | KTLA 5) which actually addresses this issue in more detail than other articles I've found. This would strongly indicate, to me, that my impression was correct, and even though the assignment may have been politically/socially ill-advised, the intent was to expose students to critical thinking in regards to a subject which isn't up for debate.

Wow. I took a look at the "credible" material the pro-hoax students were supposed to base their essays on.

Is the Holocaust a Hoax?

Really?

Maybe I'm just a stuck up liberal, but I would prefer any material that students are required to read and discuss in the classroom be a little more... academic.

I mean, I know there is a lot of total horse **** on the internet and we need to prepare kids to wade through it all and find the credible stuff. But I think making the lunatic rantings on this Christian propaganda website required reading, calling them credible and inviting students to defend them probably has the opposite effect.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Wow. I took a look at the "credible" material the pro-hoax students were supposed to base their essays on.

Is the Holocaust a Hoax?

Really?

Maybe I'm just a stuck up liberal, but I would prefer any material that students are required to read and discuss in the classroom be a little more... academic.

I mean, I know there is a lot of total horse **** on the internet and we need to prepare kids to wade through it all and find the credible stuff. But I think making the lunatic rantings on this Christian propaganda website required reading, calling them credible and inviting students to defend them probably has the opposite effect.

On the contrary, I think if one wants to start teaching critical thinking to 8th graders, then it's probably a good idea to start with softball issues, where the credible and non-credible sides are clearly outlined from the start, and clearly reflected in the type and quality of information/views available for both positions.

Also, where did you see that there were going to be "pro-hoax" students and "anti-hoax" students?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Wow. I took a look at the "credible" material the pro-hoax students were supposed to base their essays on.

Is the Holocaust a Hoax?

Really?

Maybe I'm just a stuck up liberal, but I would prefer any material that students are required to read and discuss in the classroom be a little more... academic.

I mean, I know there is a lot of total horse **** on the internet and we need to prepare kids to wade through it all and find the credible stuff. But I think making the lunatic rantings on this Christian propaganda website required reading, calling them credible and inviting students to defend them probably has the opposite effect.

So, being that it seems that the assignment was presented in the context of teaching critical thinking, you agree with me and don't have a problem with the assignment in general, but rather with the specifics of some of the material used?

 

[Drolefille]

I disagree that such a debate leaves the students with false information. If anything, equipping them with tools to discern the false from the true is the best goal. Otherwise they're left with rote learning, & taught never to challenge widely accepted opinion. If the authorities were always right about facts & values, then this might not be much of a problem. But history in particular is a slippery thing, very much dependent upon perspective & access to original sources. The history I learned in school is different from what I later learned, & this was the result of looking at more than one side of an issue. As an example, the US role in WW2 was certainly less "pure" than we were taught. Was it wrong for some like Kurt Vonnegut to challenge the patriotic status quo of WW2? No, we just saw that there was more to learn than what mainstream thought gave us.

Which is why my question was initially what would you do with the essays that come down on the side of Holocaust denial? I'm aware that history is more complex than what any high school can teach and you can typically delve ever deeper into a topic, but there are still factual matters at hand. If my child leaves school with a complex understanding of WWII that's a good thing, but if they leave school with a belief in conspiracy theories, that's a very bad thing.

I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to the project if I saw a rational conclusion to it. But then I would also worry about setting teens up to write an argumentative report and then be told they're wrong is helping them learn anything either than being ticked off about doing "pointless" work. I want teens to think critically, but it makes more sense to me to do it on an issue of opinion not one of historical fact.

Au contraire, toots!

Please don't call me toots.

I'm supporting both study & the vigorous debate of controversial issues in formal schooling.

I'd agree, if the Holocaust where academically controversial or really controversial in any other way than deniers - talking about the general antisemitism of Europe and the US's lack of interest in taking Jewish refugees, and the proponents of eugenics outside Germany are all perfectly legitimate and it helps erase the black and white portrayal of Axis and Allies - but that there weren't millions murdered in the name of racial purity is a falsehood.

 

[Alceste]

On the contrary, I think if one wants to start teaching critical thinking to 8th graders, then it's probably a good idea to start with softball issues, where the credible and non-credible sides are clearly outlined from the start, and clearly reflected in the type and quality of information/views available for both positions.

Also, where did you see that there were going to be "pro-hoax" students and "anti-hoax" students?

From the assignment: "You will read and discuss multiple, credible articles on the issue, and write an argumentative essay, based upon cited textual evidence, in which you explain whether or not you believe this was an actual event in history".

So, the assignment explicitly calls the material on that website credible, then implies that either defending or debunking it present equal chance of getting a good grade.

 

[brokensymmetry]

Wow. I took a look at the "credible" material the pro-hoax students were supposed to base their essays on.

Is the Holocaust a Hoax?

Really?

Maybe I'm just a stuck up liberal, but I would prefer any material that students are required to read and discuss in the classroom be a little more... academic.

I mean, I know there is a lot of total horse **** on the internet and we need to prepare kids to wade through it all and find the credible stuff. But I think making the lunatic rantings on this Christian propaganda website required reading, calling them credible and inviting students to defend them probably has the opposite effect.

This is disturbing and doesn't help the case for the district at all. If this website is going to be used at all it should be gone through point by point with a knowledgeable instructor. Merely pointing kids to trash like this is irresponsible.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

From the assignment: "You will read and discuss multiple, credible articles on the issue, and write an argumentative essay, based upon cited textual evidence, in which you explain whether or not you believe this was an actual event in history".

So, the assignment explicitly calls the material on that website credible, then implies that either defending or debunking it present equal chance of getting a good grade.

Through common sense, experience and reading articles regarding the assignment, I find your assumptions about the assignment, the intent, and the actual context of how it was presented to the students, to probably be incorrect and overly simplistic. Is it actually your opinion that they're open to teaching and supporting the notion that the holocaust didn't happen?

 

[brokensymmetry]

Which is why my question was initially what would you do with the essays that come down on the side of Holocaust denial? I'm aware that history is more complex than what any high school can teach and you can typically delve ever deeper into a topic, but there are still factual matters at hand. If my child leaves school with a complex understanding of WWII that's a good thing, but if they leave school with a belief in conspiracy theories, that's a very bad thing.

I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to the project if I saw a rational conclusion to it. But then I would also worry about setting teens up to write an argumentative report and then be told they're wrong is helping them learn anything either than being ticked off about doing "pointless" work. I want teens to think critically, but it makes more sense to me to do it on an issue of opinion not one of historical fact.


Please don't call me toots.

I'd agree, if the Holocaust where academically controversial or really controversial in any other way than deniers - talking about the general antisemitism of Europe and the US's lack of interest in taking Jewish refugees, and the proponents of eugenics outside Germany are all perfectly legitimate and it helps erase the black and white portrayal of Axis and Allies - but that there weren't millions murdered in the name of racial purity is a falsehood.

Right I agree with this.

If it were that easy and simple to see through conspiracy theories, propaganda, racism etc., for what it is, why are these things still so popular among adults? and adults who have graduated high school or college? While I don't actually think a 14 and 15 year old is a complete moron, I have no reason to think they are smarter than a typical adult and a typical adult I would worry about being able to assess certain kinds of evidence appropriately.

There is a way to teach about this that would help the kids learn critical skills, learn how to do history, learn how to assess evidence, but that doesn't mean suggesting to them there is a real controversy here or there is 'credible' evidence on the denial side.

Yes anyway, that rant aside I just wanted to agree with you.

 

[Alceste]

So, being that it seems that the assignment was presented in the context of teaching critical thinking, you agree with me and don't have a problem with the assignment in general, but rather with the specifics of some of the material used?

I accept your evidence that the intention was to teach critical thinking, but I think the entire exercise probably has the exact opposite effect in practice, since the denialist material uses some fairly sophisticated propaganda techniques that even most adults are ill equipped to deal with.

Basically, the denialist article is a Gish Gallop - an endless succession of false claims of such an abundance that one's opponent exhausts themselves before they get through debunking them all.

There's only one good way to defend against this technique - that is to be so well-versed in the subject matter that the deception is obvious, the futility of engaging in a debate readily apparent, and whatever argument is being presented based on false claims dismissed out of hand.

 

[Alceste]

Through common sense, experience and reading articles regarding the assignment, I find your assumptions about the assignment, the intent, and the actual context of how it was presented to the students, to probably be incorrect and overly simplistic. Is it actually your opinion that they're open to teaching and supporting the notion that the holocaust didn't happen?

No, it seems to me they're promoting holocaust denial unintentionally.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I accept your evidence that the intention was to teach critical thinking, but I think the entire exercise probably has the exact opposite effect in practice, since the denialist material uses some fairly sophisticated propaganda techniques that even most adults are ill equipped to deal with.

Basically, the denialist article is a Gish Gallop - an endless succession of false claims of such an abundance that one's opponent exhausts themselves before they get through debunking them all.

There's only one good way to defend against this technique - that is to be so well-versed in the subject matter that the deception is obvious, the futility of engaging in a debate readily apparent, and whatever argument is being presented based on false claims dismissed out of hand.

I don't have enough information to know how the assignment was being presented, guided, or taught, or what other types of materials and information the students were presented with, so I cannot make an accurate assessment of the specific details of the assignment, and what things could be modified/improved. It does seem to be a new program, so I'm sure there will be a number of issues to work out.

My only argument is that the idea itself is a good one, and that the subject matter itself shouldn't be censored or hidden from kids. And, that with the mountains of widely and freely available misinformation available these days, I think it's more important than ever to get kids thinking about the validity of sources of information, and how to apply critical thinking to what they are exposed to.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

No, it seems to me they're promoting holocaust denial unintentionally.

I don't think there's enough evidence to reliably draw this conclusion.

 

[Alceste]

I don't have enough information to know how the assignment was being presented, guided, or taught, or what other types of materials and information the students were presented with, so I cannot make an accurate assessment of the specific details of the assignment, and what things could be modified/improved. It does seem to be a new program, so I'm sure there will be a number of issues to work out.

My only argument is that the idea itself is a good one, and that the subject matter itself shouldn't be censored or hidden from kids. And, that with the mountains of widely and freely available misinformation available these days, I think it's more important than ever to get kids thinking about the validity of sources of information, and how to apply critical thinking to what they are exposed to.

I think the idea of teaching critical thinking and propaganda awareness is a good one, and the idea of teaching students how to support or defend a matter of opinion based on credible evidence is a good one, but I think teaching students historical facts about WWII are similar in quality and credibility to Christian antisemitic propaganda is a bad one.

I also think secular classrooms are better off steering clear of subjects that provoke a high level of racial or religious tension. It's not as easy to control 30+ teenagers and maintain an environment that is conducive to learning as you might think.

 

[columbus]

Through common sense, experience and reading articles regarding the assignment, I find your assumptions about the assignment, the intent, and the actual context of how it was presented to the students, to probably be incorrect and overly simplistic. Is it actually your opinion that they're open to teaching and supporting the notion that the holocaust didn't happen?

I'm glad my 8th grade teachers didn't think I was dense.

And I didn't have a mobile or Internet access.

Tom