What do students know and understand about the Holocaust?
What-do-students-know-and-understand-about-the-Holocaust1
What-do-students-know-and-understand-about-the-Holocaust1
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
34<br />
Metho<strong>do</strong>logy<br />
How were <strong>the</strong> focus-group data<br />
analysed?<br />
Knowledge <strong>and</strong> underst<strong>and</strong>ing of <strong>the</strong><br />
<strong>Holocaust</strong><br />
For <strong>the</strong> focus groups concerned with <strong>know</strong>ledge,<br />
<strong>the</strong> four key questions were used as a framework<br />
for analysis, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> transcripts were read to identify<br />
all instances of <strong>the</strong> <strong>students</strong> discussing each of <strong>the</strong><br />
questions. Across all transcripts (<strong>and</strong>, thus, across all<br />
year groups), sections of relevant text were extracted<br />
<strong>and</strong> organised into four groups that corresponded<br />
with each question.<br />
For each question, <strong>the</strong> content of <strong>the</strong> collated text<br />
was looked at to examine <strong>the</strong> different responses<br />
given by <strong>students</strong>. This included making notes on<br />
how <strong>students</strong>’ discussions were related to <strong>the</strong> survey<br />
data <strong>and</strong> creating a question-specific framework to<br />
attach <strong>the</strong> content of responses to <strong>the</strong> relevant key<br />
questions. Each transcript was coded according to<br />
this question-specific framework. For example, for<br />
<strong>the</strong> key question ‘Where did <strong>the</strong> <strong>Holocaust</strong> happen?’<br />
transcripts were coded for <strong>students</strong>’ references to:<br />
■■<br />
where <strong>the</strong> Jews came from<br />
■■<br />
where <strong>the</strong>y were killed<br />
■■<br />
Germany, Pol<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r countries<br />
■■<br />
<strong>the</strong> camp system<br />
■■<br />
<strong>the</strong> ghettos<br />
■■<br />
Einsatzgruppen<br />
A narrative on each of <strong>the</strong>se ‘codes’ was <strong>the</strong>n<br />
produced which included discussion of any patterns<br />
in <strong>students</strong>’ responses, for instance recurring<br />
misconceptions, as well as exploring any trends<br />
in <strong>the</strong>ir answers (for example, how <strong>students</strong>’<br />
underst<strong>and</strong>ing developed with age).<br />
Overall, this enabled us to map what <strong>students</strong><br />
said in response to each key question <strong>and</strong> thus<br />
give an account of <strong>students</strong>’ <strong>know</strong>ledge of what<br />
<strong>the</strong> <strong>Holocaust</strong> was, who was responsible, who <strong>the</strong><br />
victims were, <strong>and</strong> when <strong>and</strong> where <strong>the</strong> <strong>Holocaust</strong><br />
happened. Finally, <strong>students</strong>’ accounts were explored<br />
for <strong>the</strong>ir explanations of what happened during<br />
<strong>the</strong> <strong>Holocaust</strong>, <strong>and</strong> what appeared to shape <strong>and</strong><br />
influence <strong>the</strong>se explanations.<br />
Survivor testimony; The Boy in <strong>the</strong> Striped<br />
Pyjamas; attitudes towards learning <strong>about</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> <strong>Holocaust</strong><br />
A slightly different approach was taken to <strong>the</strong><br />
analysis of <strong>the</strong> focus groups conducted on survivor<br />
testimony, The Boy in <strong>the</strong> Striped Pyjamas, <strong>and</strong><br />
attitudes towards learning <strong>about</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Holocaust</strong>. For<br />
each of <strong>the</strong>se topics, <strong>the</strong> transcripts were read <strong>and</strong><br />
reread closely for <strong>the</strong>mes that emerged in <strong>students</strong>’<br />
discussions. This included recurring <strong>the</strong>mes across<br />
<strong>the</strong> transcripts (within each focus-group topic)<br />
as well as any atypical comments that <strong>students</strong><br />
made. Emergent <strong>the</strong>mes were <strong>the</strong>n compared <strong>and</strong><br />
contrasted with <strong>the</strong> findings from <strong>the</strong> survey, as well<br />
as with relevant literature.