Common Core assignment - was the Holocaust a hoax?

[Texashiker]

I would this rather not turn into a "Holocaust was faked" argument.

What I would like to see is if we have a right to question history as we know it. The victors write the history books. To every conflict there are two sides of the story. So what is the other side of the story that is never told?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...ent-in-attempt-to-meet-common-core-standards/

“It is ADL’s general position that an exercise asking students to question whether the Holocaust happened has no academic value; it only gives legitimacy to the hateful and anti-Semitic promoters of Holocaust Denial,” the email reportedly states.

My opinion, how does asking students to think in an abstract manner have no value?

Shouldn't we be able to ask "why" Japan attacked Pearl Harbor?

Shouldn't we be able to ask "why" Hitler invaded France, Poland and Russia?

When it comes to history, why should we blindly accept what we are told as absolute fact?

 

[realibrad]

I have no issue with this if it were done to college kids. The issue I might have with younger ones is that the essay would need to be put into context. If it was explained that the reason for this question is to help teach how to refute ideas that are not based in fact then I would be ok with that. If it were simply given without context then I can see where a kid might start believing that there was a question as to the validity to the argument that the Holocaust was a hoax, and that would be a problem.

 

[OCGuy]

Thread title: ".....Holocaust was a Hoax?"

First Line: "I would this rather not turn into a "Holocaust was faked" argument"

Me: "Jesus Christ" audibly.

 

[kia75]

There were 2 accurate sources, and 1 fake source for the kids to draw from, and the activity was designed to teach students to think critically about where they get their information. IMO, learning the difference between trusted and non-trusted sources is exactly what kids need to learn, lest they click on one of those " a home-maker find one simple way to make a million dollars, learn how" ads.

 

[Jaskalas]

There were 2 accurate sources, and 1 fake source for the kids to draw from, and the activity was designed to teach students to think critically about where they get their information. IMO, learning the difference between trusted and non-trusted sources is exactly what kids need to learn, lest they click on one of those " a home-maker find one simple way to make a million dollars, learn how" ads.

:thumbsup: This is a logical argument in favor of the assignment.

 

[realibrad]

There were 2 accurate sources, and 1 fake source for the kids to draw from, and the activity was designed to teach students to think critically about where they get their information. IMO, learning the difference between trusted and non-trusted sources is exactly what kids need to learn, lest they click on one of those " a home-maker find one simple way to make a million dollars, learn how" ads.

If that is what happened, then it sounds like a great idea. The issue would then seem to be that someone got uppity without understand what is going on. Sad if true.

 

[kia75]

I have no issue with this if it were done to college kids. The issue I might have with younger ones is that the essay would need to be put into context. If it was explained that the reason for this question is to help teach how to refute ideas that are not based in fact then I would be ok with that. If it were simply given without context then I can see where a kid might start believing that there was a question as to the validity to the argument that the Holocaust was a hoax, and that would be a problem.

By college it's already too late, people have decided what they trust\don't trust. IMO, 8th grade is a good grade to learn this. An elementary student would read the Holocaust Hoax article and believe it, an 8th grader who already knows Santa Claus isn't real will think more critically about being presented with an article that states a lot of what he knows is a lie.

 

[brandonb]

I'm not going to speak on the holocaust.

But I was watching the Military Channel about a year ago. It was talking about WW2 and the American/Japanese conflict. There was a big battle. Imo Jima if I remember right but it may have been one of the other large conflicts of that theater.

Now. During this episode I was watching. It was talking about the battle of course, but then at the end talked about the Japanese Admiral being tried for war crimes. He was eventually hanged for war crimes. It was talking about how he starved American POWs and such, and that was the war crime.

But during the episode, it was talking about the reason why the American's won the battle is because they were air bombing the Japanese war supply convoys, and the Japanese ran out of supplies. Ammo/food, etc.

They never connected the dots in the episode but of course I caught onto it. Was it really that this Admiral was purposely starving the POWs or was it just because they didn't have any food at all? And in a battle. I'd feed my troops over POWs. That'd make sense, right?

So what was the war crime? Who committed the crime? But things like this make me ponder the rest of WW2 war crimes. Was it the similar situation over in Europe? Maybe. Maybe not. If that was an American tactic, and Americans were over in Europe... I think it should be open for debate.

 

[Strk]

Your "why" questions aren't even close to the same as holocaust denial. In fact, your "why" questions are almost normally asked anyways in history courses.

 

[Texashiker]

Thread title: ".....Holocaust was a Hoax?"

First Line: "I would this rather not turn into a "Holocaust was faked" argument"

Me: "Jesus Christ" audibly.

Do not blame me because you jump to conclusions.

 

[Newell Steamer]

“whether or not you believe this was an actual event in history, or merely a political scheme created to influence public emotion and gain wealth.”

“With all this money at stake for Israel, it is easy to comprehend why this Holocaust hoax is so secretly guarded. In whatever way you can, please help shatter this profitable myth. It is time we stop sacrificing America’s welfare for the sake of Israel and spend our hard-earned dollars on Americans.”

These are leading statemens and questions. It is not open, but pretty pointed to where it should lead.

If this was an assignment, where the student was asked to find the origin or reasonings behind the accusations of faking the holocaust (racism, anti-semetism, etc. v. actual facts and proof it was faked), then I can understand. However, the assignment leads to one and only one outcome; do you understand that the holocaust was hoaxed?

This is wasn't an open discussion assignment.

Also,...

When it comes to history, why should we blindly accept what we are told as absolute fact?

Oh, you mean like when Jesus Christ said; no homosexuals. Got it, you can doubt millions murdered, but don't you dare doubt a Jew stating homosexuality is immoral.

 

[Strk]

These are leading statemens and questions. It is not open, but pretty pointed to where it should lead.

If this was an assignment, where the student was asked to find the origin or reasonings behind the accusations of faking the holocaust (racism, anti-semetism, etc. v. actual facts and proof it was faked), then I can understand. However, the assignment leads to one and only one outcome; do you understand that the holocaust was hoaxed?

This is wasn't an open discussion assignment.

Also,...

Oh, you mean like when Jesus Christ said; no homosexuals. Got it, you can doubt millions murdered, but don't you dare doubt a Jew stating homosexuality is immoral.

The funny part is Jesus said nothing about homosexuals.

 

[Texashiker]

Oh, you mean like when Jesus Christ said; no homosexuals.

Source?

 

[Newell Steamer]

The funny part is Jesus said nothing about homosexuals.

Exactly; ZILTCH.

But, herp-a-derp happens when you doubt the word of the Lord.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Source?

None - He never said anything bad about homosexuals.

 

[JManInPhoenix]

There were 2 accurate sources, and 1 fake source for the kids to draw from, and the activity was designed to teach students to think critically about where they get their information. IMO, learning the difference between trusted and non-trusted sources is exactly what kids need to learn, lest they click on one of those " a home-maker find one simple way to make a million dollars, learn how" ads.

I agree with this. Anything that teaches people critical thinking skills and analyzing information from a variety of sources to draw their conclusions is a good thing. There is nothing worse than blindly believing what you are told without ever questioning it.

There are few things in recent history as proven as the holocaust. There are literally thousands of testimonies of holocaust survivors, prison guards & allied soldiers who witnessed the events.

 

[realibrad]

By college it's already too late, people have decided what they trust\don't trust. IMO, 8th grade is a good grade to learn this. An elementary student would read the Holocaust Hoax article and believe it, an 8th grader who already knows Santa Claus isn't real will think more critically about being presented with an article that states a lot of what he knows is a lie.

I also included a part where I said it could be done younger if it was given context. I think by college its apparent as to the purpose, but it might not be for younger. That is why if it done, it needs to be given context.

 

[Orignal Earl]

Source?

I found a fake one

http://www.theblaze.com/

 

[v-600]

My opinion, how does asking students to think in an abstract manner have no value?

Shouldn't we be able to ask "why" Japan attacked Pearl Harbor?

Shouldn't we be able to ask "why" Hitler invaded France, Poland and Russia?

When it comes to history, why should we blindly accept what we are told as absolute fact?

I know in the UK we already do. The grades/years don't line up exactly so the ages are off by a couple of years but I know I looked at the causes of the war in 6th form. Less on Pearl Harbour as it wasn't as important to the UK as the european war, but definitely the build up to war and the economics, social and militaries of the countries involved.

I don't think that the UK would look at something like this as young but a lot of my history teaching in school was about analysing information, assessing primary and secondary sources, trying to find motivations for events and aftereffects of events, more than just learning which events occurred when.

Off topic but this seems to be going against the current govn't education policy and curriculum. Sadly.

 

[brycejones]

There were 2 accurate sources, and 1 fake source for the kids to draw from, and the activity was designed to teach students to think critically about where they get their information. IMO, learning the difference between trusted and non-trusted sources is exactly what kids need to learn, lest they click on one of those " a home-maker find one simple way to make a million dollars, learn how" ads.

Great summary. OP you still outraged?

 

[Pulsar]

There are many ways to teach critical thinking without touching upon subjects that are a tinderbox of emotions for many people.

Other topics that probably shouldn't be broached in public school:

Why slavery gets shit down and should never have been abolished.
Sex with your children: the upside of never worrying about pregnancy.

Inappropriate is a word. Maybe common core doesn't teach that one.

 

[Texashiker]

There are many ways to teach critical thinking without touching upon subjects that are a tinderbox of emotions for many people.

I can understand that.

It seems to me the ADL does not want certain things discussed. This is the way it is, accept it and leave it alone.

What upsets me about this article is the response from the adl.

 

[thraashman]

Maybe if we had more lessons like this a while back, a certain poster wouldn't inundate us with Infowars and youtube links.

 

[JManInPhoenix]

Maybe if we had more lessons like this a while back, a certain poster wouldn't inundate us with Infowars and youtube links.

LOL :awe:

 

[Exterous]

There are many ways to teach critical thinking without touching upon subjects that are a tinderbox of emotions for many people.

Other topics that probably shouldn't be broached in public school:

Why slavery gets shit down and should never have been abolished.
Sex with your children: the upside of never worrying about pregnancy.

Inappropriate is a word. Maybe common core doesn't teach that one.

I agree. You can certainly teach the questioning of sources but you should do it in HS or younger with something that doesn't have quite as much emotional charge