the boy in the striped pyjamas

[workshy]

my yr5 DD watched this in school the other day

school sent home a permission slip explaining that it was a 12 but was related to a topic they had been covering in school

I know about the film and chatted to DD about it and was confident she would be ok so I gave my permission -obviously lots of parents had absolutely no idea what the film was like and many DCs were upset by it

is it really a film they should be showing to 9&10 year olds?

[KitKatGirl1]

Holocaust should imo only be introduced in KS3. At our (grammar) school, teachers admit some yr 7s are still not ready emotionally for BITSJ and horrified that lots of them now come up from super pushy primaries having read it in yr5 or 6:-(

[mrz]

KitKatGirl1 perhaps the staff at the grammar school should familiarise themselves with recommended texts for KS2 which include these books ... nothing to do with pushy primaries rather more to do with an ill informed secondary

[alana39]

Have just read the thread with interest - DS is in Year 4 and they have been studying WWII this term. As someone said upthread it has been used across their work including rations in Maths.

The books they read were very much aimed at 8-9 yo kids, but they did look at how the war affected a variety of young people - here in London, evacuees, Anne Frank, and Jewish children generally.

They watched a short extract of The Boy In The Striped Pyjamas. I gather this helped their discussions without upsetting anyone and DS and his friends do seem to have been very involved in the whole topic.

Handled well, I think this is an entirely appropriate subject to introduce but agree that showing the whole film is Not sensible.

[KitKatGirl1]

I just think it's sad that if the secondary teachers don't think the children are emotionally ready and the parents don't, why not leave it till later?

[madamehooch]

Boy in the Striped Pyjamas was not written for children of 9 and 10.

Morris Gleitzman's 'Then' was, however. Maybe the KS2 reading list needs to be updated.

[Yellowtip]

It's absolutely unacceptable to teach anything relating to the Holocaust at all at primary level. The truth can't possibly be explored and a sanitized version is inappropriate.

I'm quite hard core yet even I asked the HT to remove a Horrible History from the library because it included a particularly gruesome description of torture, tolerable if the reader didn't know the context but pretty sickening if he did.

I'm not in the least bit naive.

[mrz]

I think it's sad secondary teachers don't bother to learn about what is in the curriculum so they know what they should build upon KitKatGirl

[bigTillyMint]

Our DC are very interested in WW2 and 1 so we watched this at home when the DC were about this age. DD had previously read the Diary of Anne Frank and they both knew a bit about what happened to Jewish people in the war. We all found it distressing, but that is not a reason not to watch it. DD subsequently read the book and said it was even sadder.

She is now in y8 and studying the Holocaust. She said that they watched a film one day which was pretty horrific, and she got very upset and angry with a couple of boys who were giggling and gave them a piece of her mind. Apparently they were very embarrassed and reduced to tears too. Maybe if they had been given a little more awareness of some of the horrors of the war at Primary school, they would have been able to cope better with the film.

[bubby64]

DH and I have seen this film, and no, we would not let Y4 watch it, we have made the decision not to let our Y6 boys watch it yet, as we both found it very upsetting.and, when they do, we want to be with them for 1to1 emotional support, which we feel would be needed. There is no way this would be available in a classroon either.
The learned about Anne Frank etc, and knew a bit about the holocaust, but this film is a bit too much for KS2 kids.
Horrible History books are a different matter altogether tho', as almost all the KS2 kids in the school LOVE them!

[KitKatGirl1]

The book is kept in the teen (13+) section in both bookshops and libraries. Surely a 'recommended' list is only that and not 'compulsory' and so primary teachers can use discretion? I don't think it should be on the list and nor do any primary or secondary teachers I know.

[mrz]

and in the upper KS2 section of Scholastic

[Yellowtip]

bubby I've never seen any other passage in a Horrible History that I found jarred for the age group, but this was most definitely one. It was truly revolting. I'm pretty unshockable, but I was shocked. I know a fair amount about the Holocaust and am a mother of eight; the entire series (which I'm a huge fan of, as are all my children) doesn't fall on this one passage but in itself, it was gross. The HT agreed.

[madamehooch]

A quote from David Fickling Books (who publish BITSP):-

"If you do start to read this book, you will go on a journey with a nine year old boy called Bruno. (Though this isn't a book for nine year olds.)"

[learnandsay]

"Because we want to educate them"

The holocaust is only one example of genocide, there is the Ottoman Turks and the Arminian genocide, the genocides of the Mongols, the killing fields of Cambodia, Rwanda and so on. Why concentrate on the holocaust in particular? And in speaking of educating children about WWII, surely the inventions of radar and the atom bomb have had a greater impact on the way we live than the holocaust.

[BalloonSlayer]

Perhaps because it is

• within living memory
  

• it took place in the continent we live in
  

• there is a lot of film/photographic evidence
  

• it links to WW2 so it is easier for younger students to put into context
  

• the main victims were one religious group, which makes it easier for young children to understand
  

• the countries where it happened were not so different from our own, we like to say "it would never happen here" but we need to ensure we never become complacent
  

• There is probably more chance of a child studying this subject having an ancestor who came to the UK to escape the holocaust than any other genocide, so there is the personal link aspect
  

• Rwanda, even Cambodia may be too recent to qualify as "history" according to the National Curriculum.
  

• the UK could have done more to help stop the Holocaust than it did. (Doubt this is covered even in KS3) so Britain bears some responsibility for keeping its young people educated on the matter

[BalloonSlayer]

• sorry yes I know Jews are a race as well as a group, should have been more specific.
  

I agree it's not for primary.

[BalloonSlayer]

uurgh religious group!

[DerbysKangaskhan]

One religious group? seriously? I think the Holocaust needs to be taught better then! The first group of victims (used as testing for mass roll out later) were disabled children. They told the parents they were going to camp, then that they had all died from one disease or another, but the extensive records the Nazis kept shows the testing. Followed by disabled adults, anyone with one Jewish grandparent (they're treated as a race, not a religion), Roma, Jehovah's Witnesses and other similar religious groups, homosexuals, Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians (particularly in Poland), anyone not obviously solely European (blacks, asians), Freemasons, anyone considered a political against them (communists, leftist views), and Esperantists along with Soviet civilians, Enemy aliens, POWs, and those caught helping undesireables to hide or escape. It's the extensiveness that really marks it out.

And the UK could have done more to help, and it could helped more particularly in Rwanda (The Europeans were evacuated) and also in Cambodia. Thankfully the yearly Holocaust Memorial day includes all modern genocides and gives many resources for it (Nottingham's Holocaust Centre is quite good and has KS2 resources). I would not use The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas as it has too many inaccuracies and glosses over how involved average people (as said, we like to play 'it could never happen here/we good people would never let that happen', but the undesireables were actively taught again in their schools and used as slave labour for shops and other works and camps were often next to towns so they could be used in such a way. It would be impossible for a 9 year old not to know).

[BalloonSlayer]

I said the "main" victims, ie the largest number of any group that were killed, not the only victims.

"The Holocaust" has in recent years come to specifically mean the genocide of the Jews perpetrated by the Nazis in the mid 20th century, so if the intention is to use the term to encompass all the victims - which I'd agree is fair - it is wise to make that clear.

(not sure why I've said that now I've typed it!)

[Yellowtip]

I second what maples has said. It's inappropriate to dumb down the Holocaust to make the teaching of it acceptable to primary school aged children.

I've taken my elder children and on another occasion a large group of Sixth Formers to Auschwitz and many of the students were profoundly affected (those weren't necessarily the ones who were most visibly affected). This is a deep, deep subject and if it can't be taught with truthfullness - so without details suppressed - then it shouldn't be tackled at all until it can be taught with the full undiminished facts, in all their horrible detail.

[Yellowtip]

Balloon I think most educated people are aware that the Holocaust involved a wide range of groups.

[Yellowtip]

mrz The Silver Sword concerns the Warsaw Uprising of 1944 and has nothing to do with the Holocaust, so not especially relevant.