Aim

Students reflect on whether it is acceptable to use generative AI (GenAI) in military history and remembrance projects. They consider expectations about authorship and audience, and move toward developing guidelines on the ethical use of AI in commemoration activities.

Objectives

Through this activity, youth will:

• reflect on the use of GenAI in education, and specifically in commemoration
• discuss potential advantages and disadvantages of using deepfakes in education
• think about changing expectations with regards to who makes projects using Gen AI

Classroom materials

• Student sheet 1 – Is it acceptable to use GenAI in education?
• Student sheet 2 – Is it acceptable to use deepfakes in education?
• Student sheet 3 - Who is making the deepfake?

Introduction

Recent advances in generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) are impressive. Sophisticated tools are becoming easily available, at no or low cost. With a few simple prompts, it is relatively easy to create photos, audio and videos that look and sound real.

AI can open powerful new avenues for commemoration. It can make archives easier to access, it can help the user to visualize battles or troop movements, or create immersive experiences that help people “feel” history. It can also cross ethical lines—blurring truth and fiction, trivializing loss or appropriating stories without consent.

Lead an introductory discussion with your class about AI-generated text, photos or videos they have encountered. Here are some questions you may want to explore:

• Where have you seen AI content? Only on social media or elsewhere too?
• What did you think of it? Can you always tell when AI is used to create something?
• Have you ever used AI to generate content? Which tools did you use? What was the end product? Who was the audience and what was its intent (to inform, entertain, persuade, etc.)?

There are no right or wrong answers. Encourage respectful discussion and diverse viewpoints.

Activity

GenAI scenarios

Let’s now reflect on the use of GenAI in education, more specifically in learning about war and remembrance.

Distribute the Student sheet 1 – Is it acceptable to use GenAI in education? and allow students to complete the scenarios.

Compare student’s responses in scenarios 1 to 4 and discuss if it’s indeed acceptable to use GenAI when learning about war and remembrance. Are there exceptions? Are there grey areas?

As a class, compile a list of Do’s and Don’ts regarding using GenAI in learning about military history and remembrance.

Deepfakes

“Deepfake” is a technique using AI to superimpose images and videos onto others, creating a false impression of an original image or video. Deepfakes seem realistic. They are often done to entertain people, but can also be used to trick, shock, mislead, anger and even frighten the audience. Are deepfakes wrong, all the time?

Distribute the Student sheet 2 – Is it acceptable to use deepfakes in education? and allow students to complete the scenarios.

Compare responses in scenarios 5 to 8 and discuss whether it is acceptable to use deepfakes when learning about war and remembrance. Consider exceptions and grey areas.

Ask some of these follow-up questions:

• Does it matter how long ago someone died in military service to use them in deepfakes?
• How might family members feel if they see a relative who died appearing in an AI-generated video?
• Do we need family consent before making a deepfake featuring a fallen service member?
• Can deepfakes help make the learning experience more engaging for the user?

You may continue your list of Do’s and Don’ts when learning about military history and remembrance using deepfakes.

Consider the source

Do the rules or the perception of the “social acceptability” change depending on who is making GenAI or deepfakes?

Distribute the Student sheet 3 - Who is making the deepfake? and allow students to complete it.

Compare responses to the John McCrae scenario and discuss whether the creator and audience change the ethical judgment.

Ask some of these follow-up questions:

• Are different creators (students, museums, relatives, governments) bound by the same standards?
• Do they have the same credibility and responsibility to disclose methods and sources?
• Do they have the same power to reach an audience?
• Do these different kinds of creators have the same obligations?
• For example:
  • to consult during the conceptual and creation phases?
  • to disclose the information they have used?
  • to document their creative process?
  • to preserve the information they used?
  • to be able to justify decisions made?

Do you have the same expectations when you watch content produced by a student, an organization, a relative or a government?

Conclusion

Students have been reflecting about the use of GenAI and deepfakes in learning about military history and remembrance.

Just because technology now makes it very easy to use GenAI and deepfakes, should we always use it? If so, what are the guidelines to follow?

Students will finish this activity by synthesizing their thinking to create guidelines on the ethical use of GenAI in commemoration projects. They can then share them with other classes to foster safe, respectful use of these new technologies.

Optional starter ideas for these guidelines on the ethical use of GenAI:

• Always disclose when and how GenAI or deepfakes are used.
• Do not recreate traumatic events in ways that sensationalize or trivialize suffering.
• Avoid putting words into the mouths of real individuals without consent and strong historical justification.
• Prioritize historical accuracy and respect for the fallen and cite your sources.
• Consider audience vulnerability and potential for harm or misunderstanding.
• Use AI as a support for learning, not a replacement for authentic historical sources.