MUSEUM-L Archives

Museum discussion list

MUSEUM-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Carol Alexandra Ely <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 27 Jan 1995 16:27:59 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (49 lines)
I have hesitated to jump in on this thread because it's so
complicated.
 
The fired House historian (whose name I have forgotten) gave an
interview a few days ago in the Washington Post - I no longer
have it but maybe our associate from the Post, Mr. Burchard,
could locate and summarize it.
 
The curriculum "Facing History and Ourselves" was created to
teach about the Holocaust in particular, genocide in general,
and our obligations to each other as human beings. It
encourages self-questioning and examination of personal and
social values. It has been used successfully in many different
kinds of educational settings, and is a model for teaching
values-based education.
 
The House historian (at a previous academic position) objected
to parts of the curriculum on the basis of balance (the Nazis
and KKK viewpoints). However, the curriculum does consider the
Nazi viewpoint in some detail, including excerpts from "Mein
Kampf". The creators of the curriculum understand that it is
quite essential to understand the ideology involved in order to
examine values and actions.
 
She says that this material was
included as a result of the critique given by herself and
others. Groups who have supported the curriculum seem to feel
that the conservative objection was deeper than a fair critique
of "balance" would seem to call for, and suggest that what is
really being objected to is the attempt to get students to
question their own values, and those of their families - that
this is subversive to the authority of the family.
 
Those who have worked to combat Holocaust "revisionism" are
wary of giving any support to the concept that there is a
legitimate other point of view on the Holocaust (and they are
right), but may have unfairly lumped the fired House historian
in with the revisionists when she was just critiquing the
curriculum according to the guidelines she was given. So she
says, and may be right; but only those who know the state of
the curriculum and what her comments were can really judge.
 
This is my understanding. I know the curriculum and the people
who created it; I'm not objective.
 
Carol Ely
Virginia Discovery Museum
Charlottesville

ATOM RSS1 RSS2