Organisational information at a glance
Conference: 17/18 September 2026
Location: Berlin, Lower Saxony State Representation
Organisers: Stiftung Niedersächsische Gedenkstätten/Gedenkstätte Bergen-Belsen / Gedenk- und Bildungsstätte Haus der Wannsee-Konferenz
Contact: info@stiftung-ng.de
Submission deadline: 16 March 2026 (feedback by 10 April 2026)
Scope of abstract: max. 500 words, supplemented by a short biographical note
Conference language: German
Costs: Travel, accommodation and catering costs will be covered. Input providers receive a fee of €300.
Background and aim
Memorials, documentation centres and historical-political education centres are caught between the poles of discrimination-sensitive language, accessibility issues and design for all.
Exhibition texts and social media content should be short, clear and accessible - around 500 characters per object text -, diagrams and maps clear, narratives easy to follow.
At the same time, precise self-designations, gender forms and context-sensitive curating require space - which can then be lacking for historical classification. Psychoanalytical or socio-psychological concepts such as projection, rationalisation or defence against guilt are often used in the communication of content critical of anti-Semitism - but these are not automatically comprehensible.
Visitors to memorial and educational sites learn not only through exhibitions, but also through the way they are encountered. The institutional approach is therefore itself part of educational and public relations work. The conference therefore asks:
- How can it be ensured that no racist or anti-Semitic experiences are reproduced in these places?
- How can it be reduced in such a way that nothing essential is lost - and specified in such a way that nobody is excluded?
- How can complex, politically and morally charged content (anti-Semitism, ideology, perpetrator research) be communicated in an understandable and inclusive way without trivialising or reproducing stereotypes?
- Where is the limit of simplification at which accessibility tips over into affirmation? How much complexity does ideological criticism need in order to be effective?
The conference brings together practice, research and perspectives from representatives of different communities. The aim is to make conflicts visible, share tried and tested strategies and discuss research and evaluation approaches.
Thematic focus
Contributions on the following topics are welcome:
Text economy & discrimination-sensitive language
- How do institutions deal with character limits when correct terms (e.g. self-designations, gender forms) take up space?
- What rules have proved effective (glossaries, first mention, typography, etc.)?
- Do multi-layered formats (text + visual + dialogue, in-depth media guide tours, etc.) and didactic transparency (e.g. "This text is abridged - further information here...") help?
Technical language vs. comprehensibility
- What is gained or lost by omitting technical terms? How can theory be translated without distorting it (everyday language + optional technical terms)?
- When does language fit the audience - and when does it only reflect assumptions about who the visitors are? How do we avoid simplification based on preconceptions about the audience rather than their actual needs?
- How easy is it to communicate about topics such as collaboration during the Nazi era? What content-dense guided tours in easy/simple language are available?
Guided tours & educational interaction
- Which communication and interaction styles of guides prove to be low-threshold and inclusive?
- How are technical terms, standardisations and moral frameworks negotiated in conversations with visitors?
Multi-perspectivity as a design problem
- How multi-perspectival can narrative clarity be? What is the tension between attention spans, orientating exhibition design and multi-perspective narratives (perspective architecture, object and image politics, scenography/dramaturgy)?
- How can perpetrator motifs (ideology, careerism, peer pressure, institutional logics) be presented - interwoven, but not arbitrarily?
Visitor research & evaluation
- What is received by whom? How can we analyse what users receive and understand and how?
- How much text do visitors actually read? Which images attract attention? Which sources do users use to learn new things?
- Which indicators help to measure changes in reach? Which users are new? Who is (not) being reached?
- How can texts, selection of objects, video scripts or guidance language be improved at an early stage through evaluation - for example through prototyping, A/B tests, shadowing or teach-back methods?
Types of contribution and target group
Presentations, workshop reports, practical reflections, case studies, design feedback sessions and method workshops are welcome.
The call is aimed at:
- memorial and educational centres, places of remembrance, museums
- Self-advocacy organisations and community representatives
- Universities and research institutions
- Design offices and digital service providers
Interdisciplinary contributions are expressly welcome. Relevant disciplines include:
- Museum Studies / Curatorial Studies / Heritage Studies
- History didactics, memorial and educational site pedagogy
- Anti-Semitism research / Holocaust studies / Jewish studies
- Romani Studies / Antiziganism Studies
- Linguistics, sociolinguistics, translation studies, specialised communication
- Disability studies / inclusion research
- Information design / UX writing / communication design
- Social and cognitive psychology
- Visitor research / evaluation research / participation research
- Political education / adult education (especially education critical of anti-Semitism and racism)
Submission
We request an abstract of max. 500 words and a short biographical note. Please send the abstract with the keyword "Inclusive and ideology-critical?" by 16 March 2026 by email to info@stiftung-ng.de.
We will inform you of acceptance by 10 April 2026.