Support

The educational work at memorial sites lacks norms and standardization. Whereas a school teacher, or a tourist guide, has to receive standardized formal education, guides at memorial sites do not. In the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights publication Human rights education at Holocaust memorial sites across the European Union: An overview of practices, based on an extensive research of memorials across Europe, the following statement appears (page 12):

 "…the success of visits to memorial sites and museums (is) linked primarily to the quality of the educational approach and the competence of the staff of the particular institution". 

The support for guides needs to address questions such as how do we learn from history? How do we combine between history and the dilemmas and needs of society today? How can we learn from atrocities and draw positive values out of them? How can we learn from traumatic events and draw positive values from them? How can we engender civic education through a visit to a memorial site? How can we teach educational staff to empower their students? What sorts of structures engender interaction among participants? What sort of structures engender reflection, and how can they be implemented?

Most memorials in Europe do not have a formal education of pedagogical staff. In general, the preparation guides receive is of historical nature, and very little to no preparation on education. Thus guides need to face the enormous educational challenges that are posed by the visit to a site, lacking the professional preparation needed.

This can, albeit partially, be explained by the lack of educational concepts for education at memorial sites. On its establishment, the pedagogical team of the Mauthausen Memorial took upon itself to both develop such a concept as well as develop a professional educational framework for the memorial's guides. The Mauthausen Memorial educational concept, developed 2008 – 2009, serves as the basis for the guides' education. The process of becoming a guide takes one year, and begins with public tender inviting those interested to apply. After reviewing the applications and holding hearings with the most appropriate applicants, a training containing seven units and lasting eight months takes place, after which the successful participants become guides at the site.

The support for guides needs to address questions such as how do we learn from history? How do we combine between history and the dilemmas and needs of society today? How can we learn from atrocities and draw positive values out of them? How can we learn from traumatic events and draw positive values from them? How can we engender civic education through a visit to a memorial site? How can we teach educational staff to empower their students? What sorts of structures engender interaction among participants? What sort of structures engender reflection, and how can they be implemented?

The working group 2 has the task of developing ideas and methods in order to support the guides in their work at the memorial site. This applies to the guides’ attitudes, their social and psychological background, emotional situation and experience. 

After having developed a three-dimensional goal for the first workshop which stated the importance of self-positioning, self-image and self-empowerment, in the second phase of the EU-project the working group 2 focused on defining tools and methods which could help to achieve these goals.

The tools range from various possibilities for psychological support (e.g. individual supervision, intervision, feedback dialogue etc.) to methods for improving the horizontal communication between the guides (e.g. annual meetings, peer review, telephone hotline etc.).

During the second workshop and the exchange with the experts it became clear that we also need to address the difficulties guides face in the practical pedagogical work. Guides do not only need specific knowledge regarding the history of the memorial site, but also need to be equipped with tools regarding the interactive work in order to stimulate personal reflection on the part of the visitors. Even before that, guides need to be supported in their own personal reflection:

  • What is their personal approach towards the work at the memorial site and the history of the National Socialism and the Holocaust?
  • How does the family history of the guides influence their work?

Other important questions are:

  • How can the guides be supported in dealing with sensitive topics with the groups?
  • How can we deconstruct myths and established narratives without distressing the visitors too much?
  • How do we deal with failings in the pedagogical work?

In order to address those problems in the best possible way, partly already in the guide development program, we need to find out which situations in the educational work cause problems, and why. Asking the guides to share their problems, doubts and concerns therefore is the first step in the next phase of the EU project.

The working group 2 gave a short introduction on the current situation of the guides at the Mauthausen Memorial. The group emphasized three dimensions that could and should be worked on in order to improve the situation.

The first important topic would be the self-positioning of the guides (e.g. towards the guide pool, the memorial), which would help to achieve some clarity regarding the representation of interests, communication etc.

The second dimension would be the self-image. An interesting question to pose is what a job description of a guide at a memorial site would say. Is it even possible to formulate one? Working on the self-image of the guides is necessary in order to achieve a self-reflective educational, political and didactical self.

Last but not least self-empowerment should be promoted. To achieve the goal of a learning, acting, communicating and communicative network, spaces and methods are required that help the guides progress in their work.

The working group 2 presented a first draft for an assortment of methods (ranging from ways to facilitate easier access to specific knowledge to various possible forms for psychological support).

The question how a good basis for networking among the guides in the pool can be created was discussed among all participants. Since the guides would need to invest their time and have travelling expenses, they should also benefit from possible networking meetings: perhaps it is simply a matter of choosing themes that are important to everyone or themes that are important to specific groups with specific agendas.

As far as the system and structure of communication is concerned, the primary goal must be for the guides to get the feeling of being helped and supported. Apart from that, guides need to know who to contact if they want to start initiatives. This means that in the future, institutionalized rules and forms of taking up the guides’ interests must be established.

In the next phase of the EU project, the working group 2 will continue to work on the different tools and methods which could help to achieve the three goals mentioned above.