The Digital Dimensions of Witnessing: Learning with

Technology and Testimony

Alan S. Marcus

University of Connecticut

Published: December 31, 2025

Corresponding Author:

Alan S. Marcus

alan.marcus@uconn.edu

DOI:

https://doi.org/DOI: 10.29173/assert94

Pages: 1-7

Distributed under Creative

Commons

Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0

International (CC BY-NC 4.0).

subject to the Creative Commons

license.

ABSTRACT

This introduction to the special issue on digital testimony provides

context to the articles that follow including an overview of key issues in

using digital Holocaust survivor testimony and a discussion of some

challenges and dilemmas. Teaching with digital testimony must

consider the transition from in-person to digital survivor testimony,

issues of memory and history, and the benefits and limitations of the

technology. There are important implications for teachers who often see

testimony as a way to develop empathy.

How to cite this article (APA): Marcus, A. S. (2025). The digital dimensions of

witnessing: Learning with technology and testimony. Annals of Social Studies Research

for Teachers, 7(2), 1-7. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.29173/assert94

Marcus The Digital Dimensions of Witnessing

INTRODUCTION

“That technology is crazy” was the positive response of a high school student when

first experiencing an interactive digital Holocaust survivor in class. This type of

response was repeated over and over in my research with thousands of secondary

students, along with comments such as “I wanted to hear more.” However, as a field,

evidence to support the effective use of digital testimony is thin.

Advances in technology provide opportunities to engage students through virtual

experiences and preserve the memories of first-person witnesses. For the Holocaust

in particular, we have reached the point where in-person Holocaust survivors

speaking to school groups is being replaced (if at all) by interactive digital survivors –

the future of first-person Holocaust testimony. Scholars believe that digital Holocaust

memory is a turning point in the way we remember the Holocaust (Tirosh and Mikel-

Arieli 2023). This special issue of ASSERT is dedicated to examining the potential

uses, challenges, and ethical issues of testimony and technology with profound

implications for learning, civic engagement, and the future of historical knowledge.

The Holocaust provides one of the most extensive and well-documented attempts to

digitize testimony and use it for educational purposes. The use of testimony in

education became more prominent and accepted as survivors emerged from the

shadow of the Holocaust to share their personal stories with secondary students and

as survivor stories became preserved in digital form through the Fortunoff Video

Archive at Yale University and the Shoah Foundation at the University of Southern

California, among other efforts. The growth of first-person testimony as a legitimate

and powerful tool in Holocaust and genocide education generated scholarship and

debates about the difference between history and memory (Baquero, 2021), the

reliability and purpose of first-person testimony in education, and the role of

testimony in historiography (Baquero, 2021). Other scholarship has focused on

pedagogical practices with testimony, the tension with testimony as on the one hand

being necessary but at the same time “the impossibility of fully bearing witness to this

Marcus The Digital Dimensions of Witnessing

particular traumatic past” (Hirsch and Spitzer, 2009, p.152), debates about the

purposes and limitations of Holocaust and genocide education more broadly (Haas,

2020), and other disciplinary, ethical, and educational issues.

We are now entering the “post-survivor era” (Michlic, 2017, p.xxvii) where the

Holocaust will move from ‘‘contemporary history’’ to ‘‘remote history.’’ (Assmann,

2006, p.271). The loss of Holocaust survivors who can testify, combined with new

technologies and an online environment that dominates daily life, provides new

educational opportunities and significant dangers. Classroom visits by survivors were

the exception, but the digitization of survivors provides much wider access and

expands the range of events that can be explored beyond the Holocaust. While the

Holocaust has been the focal point of much preservation of testimony and

scholarship, there is an expanding availability of digital testimony provided by

museums, universities, and other organizations. Some testimony is still in traditional

video format while other testimony is interactive and uses augmented and/or virtual

reality. Just a few examples include the Genocide Archives of Rwanda, the US

Veterans History Project, VR testimony from survivors of sexual assault, Oral

testimony from 9/11, testimony from displaced Palestinians, and testimonies from the

Armenian Genocide and Nanjing Massacres among others. By digital testimony we

include video, interactive digital representations, social media apps, and virtual/mixed

reality programs.

CHALLENGES AND DILEMMAS OF TECHNOLOGY AND TESTIMONY

The transition from the oral tradition to the digital realm is not merely a shift in format;

it is a transformation in the nature of the historical document itself. For those who are

using digital technology because of the new opportunities it creates or as an

alternative to first-person knowledge, there are a number of important differences

with significant implications for teacher practices. Digital versions of testimony may

be virtual or mixed reality experiences that are as much about place as narrative, or

they might be like the Shoah Foundation’s IWitness program which is focused on

Marcus The Digital Dimensions of Witnessing

Q&A with a survivor. Digital testimony potentially lessens the connection students

can make with a live person and relies instead on the illusion of presence (Marcus, et

al, 2021), which can vary greatly. Control over the narrative is changed with digital

testimony as agency over the narrative shifts from the first-person to the teacher or

museum educator or student depending on who is asking questions and facilitating

the experience. Digital testimony, as limited by current technology, is frozen in time,

and can become “ossified as a static monument” (Schwartzman, 2020, p.68) so that

the testimony cannot respond to related current events (e.g. immigration policy in the

US, the War in Ukraine, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict) or adjust to the specific

audience or educational goals. Finally, digital testimony requires different preparation

and training for educators who need additional knowledge and skills such as content

background related to the testimony (e.g. to explain an event or concept that might

be mentioned) and how to use the technology effectively (e.g. how to phrase

questions).

First-person testimony is not just about what happened but helps us understand how

an event was experienced, how it is remembered, how those memories are

preserved for future generations, and has us ask, “what kind of shadow does the past

cast over the present?” (Assmann, 2006, p.263). Educator goals for including these

memories and how testimonies are used are critical. Is digital testimony used to

improve knowledge of an event? To build empathy? To inspire further exploration?

To engage is civic action? Davison (2002) suggests that “because of how human

memory works, especially in relation to traumatic events, oral testimonies cannot be

taken as true historical fact” (p. 1). Testimony is one approximation of truth but is

imprecise (Woods 2021). It is in part what we want it to be and what we want it to

enable us to do (Pearce, 2020, 3). Yet Pearce (2020) reminds us why we seek to

preserve memory, because remembering is, “more than just an exercise in defying

the passage of time and takes on connotations of securing and guaranteeing truth in

the face of tyrannical oblivion” (p. 4). The value in survivor testimony is not to convey

one truth, but to make the experiences of the survivor personal, accessible, and real

compared to other sources (Marcus, 2025). The affective engagement with testimony

Marcus The Digital Dimensions of Witnessing

creates a pathway for students to transfer historical lessons to contemporary issues.

However, trust between the survivor and the audience is a crucial element for

effective testimony (Ballis and Schwendemann 2021, 26). Is it more difficult to build

trust with digital testimony?

ARTICLES IN THIS ISSUE

Research, especially with K-12 students, has not kept up with the pace of change in

how testimony is represented and used. The three articles in this issue each tackle a

different aspect of technology and testimony, providing insights into research,

describing specific programs, and suggesting tips for teachers. All three articles

emphasize that digital experiences for students cannot be stand-alone occurrences,

they are not self-sufficient. The authors advocate for using digital testimony

experiences in combination with traditional media and sources of Holocaust

education, while taking into account what is unique about digital testimony.

McGregor, Hicks, and Stoddard describe the Forever Project at the National

Holocaust Centre in England. The Forever Project includes interactive digital

testimony from ten Holocaust survivors. The authors discuss the ethical issues faced

by staff, reactions from students and implications for teachers, suggesting five ways

to think about how to use digital testimony. Gloe, Heindl, and Kolb report on findings

from multiple studies that examine the use of Interactive Digital Testimonies (IDTs) in

Germany highlighting the importance of contextualization and reflection when using

IDTs, including at Holocaust museums. They found that the integration of IDTs in

Holocaust museums significantly impacts visitor engagement and historical

perception and they discuss concerns about authenticity and the nature of digital

memory. Effective implementation relies heavily on providing three forms of

preparatory context - factual, personal, and technical. Finally, Droumpouki presents a

virtual reality experience at the Chaidari Concentration Camp in Greece. The

experience, through a VR app, reconstructs the camp’s historical and emotional

significance. The creators merged archival research, survivor testimonies, and 3D

Marcus The Digital Dimensions of Witnessing

modeling to create a historically faithful VR experience. Droumpouki reports on the

success of the VR experience and encourages interdisciplinary learning. The project

also highlights the unique, underrepresented experience of the Holocaust in Greece.

REFERENCES

Assmann, A. (2006). History, memory, and the genre of testimony. Poetics today, 27(2),

261-273.

Ballis, A., & Schwendemann, L. (2021). “In any case, you believe him one hundred

percent, everything he says.” Trustworthiness in Holocaust survivor talks with

high school students in Germany. Holocaust Studies, 1–30.

https://doi.org/10.1080/17504902.2021.191 5016.

Baquero, Rafael Pérez (2021). Witnessing Catastrophe. Studia Phaenomenologica, 21,

177-196.

Davison, E. D. (2022, Fall). Digital Oral Testimony for Holocaust Education: Limitations,

Benefits, and Practical Use. The Journal of Historical Studies, 11(1), 1-9.

Foster, S., Pearce, A., & Pettigrew, A. (2020). Holocaust Education: Contemporary

challenges and controversies. University College

London. https://muse.jhu.edu/book/81875.

Haas, Brandon J. (2020). Bearing witness: Teacher perspectives on developing

empathy through Holocaust survivor testimony, The Social Studies, 111(2), 86-

103. DOI: 10.1080/00377996.2019.1693949

Hirsch, M., & Spitzer, L. (2009). The witness in the archive: Holocaust studies/memory

studies. Memory Studies, 2(2), 151-170.

Marcus, A.S., Maor, R., McGregor, I.M., Mills, G., Schweber, S., Stoddard, J., & Hicks,

D. (2021). Holocaust education in transition from live to virtual survivor testimony:

Pedagogical and ethical dilemmas. Holocaust Studies, 28(3), 279–301.

Marcus, A.S. (2025). “She’s in the Room with Us…” Approaches to digital Holocaust

survivor testimony in an American secondary school. In A. Ballis, F. Duda, M.

Gloe (Eds.), Technology meets testimony: Digital pathways to Holocaust

survivors' biographies (pp. 137-165). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-45924-6

Michlic, J. B. (Ed.). (2017). Jewish families in Europe, 1939-present: History,

representation, and memory. Brandeis University Press.

Pearce, A. (2020). Challenges, issues and controversies: The shapes of ‘Holocaust

education’ in the early twenty-first century. In S. Foster, A. Pearce, & A. Pettigrew

(Eds.), Holocaust education: Contemporary challenges and controversies (pp. 1-

27). UCL Press.

Schwartzman, R. (2020). (Re)mediating Holocaust survivor testimony. Advances in

Social Sciences Research Journal, 7(12), 68-80.

Tirosh, N., & Mikel-Arieli, R. (2023). What we talk about when we talk about digital

Holocaust memory: A systematic analysis of research published in academic

journals, 2010–2022. The Communication Review, 26(2), 151–170.

Woods, R. (2021). Working with testimony: Recent trends and issues. Unpublished

Marcus The Digital Dimensions of Witnessing

manuscript.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Alan Marcus is Professor in the Department of Curriculum & Instruction at the University of

Connecticut and is a UConn Teaching Fellow. His scholarship and teaching focus on museum

education, teaching with film, and global education, with an emphasis on the Holocaust, teaching

with testimony, and teaching difficult topics. Alan is a Faculty Fellow for the Holocaust Institute for

Teacher Education at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and runs an education

abroad program for pre-service teachers in Nottingham, England. Alan was the lead editor, and a

writer, for the State of Connecticut Social Studies Standards. His current research includes

evaluating the potential and limitations of digital interactive Holocaust survivor testimony. He is the

director of the Morris and Judy Sarna Breaking Bias and Creating Community program using

virtual reality and digital Holocaust survivors with secondary school students. Alan is a former high

school social studies teacher.