A Modern Frankenstein: Professional Military Education Reform In The Age Of ChatGPT

by Lieutenant-Colonel Nathan Richards

There was something at work in my soul, which I do not understand.

- Mary Shelley, Frankenstein

INTRODUCTION

The rapid evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT has ushered in a new era of automated language learning and synthesis and pushes the boundaries of what is possible in terms of knowledge creation and synthesis. ChatGPT has been praised for its impressive abilities and potential applications, but it also raises some serious concerns about its impact on post-secondary education. As this technology develops, it presents several benefits and challenges to the status quo and underlying assumptions of professional military education (PME). In this paper, the author argues that ChatGPT poses a serious challenge to the current model of PME by offering students an effortless way to generate quality academic content without developing critical thinking and communication skills.^{Footnote 1}  The article explores how ChatGPT could undermine the quality and integrity of PME by enabling academic dishonesty; how ChatGPT could reduce the value of PME by allowing students to use the technology to produce accurate assignments but avoid developing critical thinking skills; and, ultimately, how PME institutions might reform to incorporate AI tools into the curriculum so the standard of critical thought is preserved for the military leaders of tomorrow.

This article examines the implications of ChatGPT technology on PME, with a focus on the Joint Command and Staff Programme (JCSP) taught at the Canadian Forces College (CFC). While the article focuses on the impacts of AI technology on the JCSP, many lessons can be gleaned from this examination for other PME courses within the CFC and wider audiences in academia.

First, the article begins with an overview of the wider context by looking to other similar historical technology-driven educational crises such as the written word, the printing press, and the calculator and their impacts on the development of intellectual skills. As with many other past disruptive technologies, ChatGPT causes fear and excitement as it challenges the academic status quo. However, over time, it will enable individuals to think more deeply and to explore more complex topics at a much faster rate than what was previously possible. Second, the article offers a brief overview of ChatGPT and highlights its strengths and limitations. Third, the author evaluates the current models of academic assessment and learning objectives for the JCSP at the CFC. Then, the author demonstrates how ChatGPT might be used to circumvent the objectives of PME through creative prompt engineering but without any of the critical thought traditionally required to complete these objectives. Finally, the author proposes several recommendations for restructuring JCSP to incorporate AI  tools for the benefit of both students and instructors. The article argues that, by reforming its approach to JCSP, the CFC might remain relevant in preparing the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF)’s leaders for future challenges.

HISTORICAL DISRUPTIVE TECHNOLOGIES

Technology-driven transformations are nothing new for humanity. There have been several technologies that have demonstrated that, while emergent technology may seem to be a threat to the status quo, humanity ultimately adapts.

Socrates and the Written Word

Perhaps the first crisis of technology was demonstrated by Plato in his work Phaedrus, which is written in the form of a dialogue between Socrates, and Attican aristocrat Phaedrus. Plato argued against the invention of writing in favour of the oral tradition.

[The written word] will atrophy people’s memories. Trust in writing will make them remember things by relying on marks made by others, from outside themselves, not on their own inner resources, and so writing will make the things they have learnt disappear from their minds. Your invention is a potion for jogging the memory, not for remembering. You provide your students with the appearance of intelligence, not real intelligence.^{Footnote 2} 

Socrates believed the written word would lead to widespread forgetfulness and ignorance, as people would depend on written words rather than memorize and learn the information for themselves. He further argued that written words could not engage in debate, clarify, or be corrected.^{Footnote 3}  He believed that if one does not engage in memorization, personal study and questioning, then one cannot truly claim to possess any knowledge. Thus, the written word fundamentally challenged the primacy of academic dialogue, which was an immediate threat to the status quo and his way of life. Ironically, the very fact that Socrates’ views on writing were recorded and preserved by Plato serves to undermine his own argument.^{Footnote 4} 

Despite his warning, clearly, written words can be reworked, challenged, and refuted in both oral and written form. Far from impeding one’s ability to create and process knowledge, writing allowed humans to delve more deeply into topics by exposing individual research to a wider selection of sources and perspectives than could ever be experienced from individual face to face contacts. Instead of a hindrance, writing has become an essential tool in the acquisition and synthesis of knowledge. The technology

of writing transformed academia and education from one of rote memorization—limited by human faculty— to mass script where knowledge can be stored and shared outside of the human experience. Where at first it was critiqued as the end of critical thought, society embraced this new technology and adapted its structures around it.

The Catholic Church and the Printing Press

The introduction of the printing press in the mid-fifteenth century marked another inflection point in how knowledge was transferred. By enabling the mass production of books, it broadened the access to knowledge to the public, thus allowing for the spread of ideas and challenging entrenched power structures.^{Footnote 5}  Moreover, this new technology enabled the dissemination of knowledge from elites to the people, thereby creating a new way to transmit and receive knowledge. As a result, this marked a significant inflection point in the way knowledge was transferred, cultivating a new learning environment, changing the landscape of education and academia as well as theological and political philosophy. The printing press allowed not only the writing of texts but the mass production of books. Where manuscripts were once limited to the efforts of a scribe, machines could now print large books accurately and quickly. This transformation led to the proliferation of ideas and allowed for mass education in an era where only the wealthy were afforded such a luxury. This also had major consequences for the Catholic Church, which used their access to sacred texts to monopolize access to the divine and therefore maintain their knowledge as power. By facilitating the widespread dissemination of sacred texts in common language—instead of Latin—it allowed common people to access divine knowledge independently, thus diminishing the authority of the Catholic Church. This new technology, therefore, was a major contributing factor to the changes in power dynamics that were seen in Europe during the Renaissance. Print technology gave rise to “an explosion of knowledge and a deepening of thought, such as the Renaissance, the industrial revolution, mass literacy, and public education.”^{Footnote 6}  Where at first this new technology was critiqued as the end of critical thought, society embraced it and adapted its structures around it.

High Schools and the Calculator

Yet another inflection point in emerging technology was the use of electronic calculators, which were widely adopted in the 1970s.^{Footnote 7}  The academic community initially reacted with skepticism to the widespread adoption of the calculator. They were concerned that the calculator would be used as a substitute for mathematical skills, making it harder for students to learn and apply them.^{Footnote 8}  Some suggested that the use of calculators might lead to students being overdependent on them, thus hindering the development of essential mental math skills.^{Footnote 9}  Additionally, it was also argued that the use of calculators would limit student creativity and impede the development of problem-solving abilities.^{Footnote 10} 

Over time, though, the academic community embraced the calculator as a tool that could help students learn and practice mathematics more efficiently. The introduction of calculators in math classrooms, first scientific and then graphing, had a profound impact on what was taught and especially on how it was taught. Calculators allowed students to deal with real-world problems; investigate problems of interest to them; and pose and solve problems using mathematical techniques that would have been inaccessible without the technology. They removed the drudgery of long calculations and allowed teachers to focus on important mathematics, rather than on basic calculations.^{Footnote 11}  That allowed students to develop a deeper understanding of mathematical concepts and enabled teachers to cover more complex topics in the same amount of time.^{Footnote 12}  The widespread adoption of the calculator also made mathematics more accessible to a larger number of students, allowing them to pursue further studies in mathematics or related fields.

Overall, writing, print technology and the calculator have been revolutionary forces in the development of knowledge, challenging accepted modes of knowledge creation and control. Initially, these disruptive technologies caused fear, anxiety, and uncertainty—all human instincts to protect the status quo. These technologies are used for both good and evil depending on the intent of the user. Ultimately, these technological disruptions have led to a transformation of thought and the ways in which individuals interact, create, and share information. Disruptive technologies have enabled individuals to think more deeply and with greater speed. Prior to these technologies, people were constrained to working on simpler tasks instead of taking the time to dwell on advanced concepts. However, with the introduction of these technologies, individuals have had the opportunity to expand their understanding of more complex topics and to do so with greater speed.

ChatGPT is the next evolution of emergent technology disrupting the status quo. Like other transformative technologies, it is causing waves in education, academia, the economy, and society in general.

WHAT IS CHATGPT?

ChatGPT is a chatbot developed by OpenAI that uses a large language model base to generate human-like responses in conversational dialogue. ChatGPT was released for public use on November 30, 2022, and is designed to assist users with tasks such as answering questions and composing text. ChatGPT’s primary sources are based on the “Common Crawl” dataset, which is comprised of 570 gigabytes of publicly available archives of web pages, books, articles, and conversation logs that span from 2016–2019.^{Footnote 13} 

ChatGPT can produce and synthesize a large amount of text based on a “prompt.” In this context, a prompt is a statement or a question used to start a conversation. ChatGPT is designed to remember user input, respond to follow-up corrections and feedback to improve its accuracy and performance, and decline inappropriate requests and sensitive topics. It can generate data in a table, add indexes, understand code, answer questions, generate text, and translate between most languages, all while using reinforcement learning with human feedback to adapt to different situations.

ChatGPT’s pattern-based text generation is fundamentally different than human reasoning. Humans rely on logical reasoning to form conclusions and judgments based on evidence and knowledge. Alternatively, ChatGPT is an AI language model that produces text based on patterns it has learned from large amounts of data. Unlike humans, it does not have the capacity for logical reasoning, instead relying on statistical models to predict likely outcomes.^{Footnote 14}  Yet, ChatGPT has evolved to the point where it can provide precision information synthesis, which seems much like human reasoning. As the chatbot learns from users, its ability for information synthesis continues to grow and create higher quality responses.

The Strengths of ChatGPT

One of the most impressive capabilities of ChatGPT is its ability to process and analyze vast amounts of data at a speed and scale that is beyond human capabilities. For example, it can quickly analyze and link data from diverse sources such as academic papers, scientific reports, news articles, and social media posts. By doing so, it can uncover hidden patterns and relationships that would be difficult or impossible for a human researcher to identify. This enables ChatGPT to generate new insights and knowledge that can drive innovation and progress across a wide range of fields. Moreover, ChatGPT’s ability to make connections between massive data sets has important implications for decision-making. It can assist humans in making more informed and accurate decisions. This has particular relevance in fields such as healthcare, finance, and business, where the ability to process and analyze large amounts of data can lead to better outcomes and improved efficiency.

However, while ChatGPT’s speed and scalability are impressive, it is important to note that AI tools are not infallible. They  are only as good as the data they are trained on and the algorithms they use. Therefore, it is crucial to ensure that AI tools are designed and implemented with transparency, accountability, and ethical considerations in mind—OpenAI is still addressing them.  By doing so, we can harness the power of AI to make connections between massive data sets and generate new knowledge, while minimizing the risks and challenges associated with this technology. Present-day media is rife with examples of users employing ChatGPT to challenge and ultimately surpass graduate-level-program test and essay requirements.^{Footnote 15} 

ChatGPT is a powerful tool that enhances the user’s ability to communicate. It can generate high-quality responses to a wide range of prompts, such as crafting essay outlines, arguments, and even entire essays. It can act as a personal assistant that is available 24/7 and is capable of quickly synthesizing and organizing information to help users who struggle with grammar, sentence structure, and spelling. ChatGPT can generate elegant prose from simple bullet points. This feature is particularly useful for those who are not skilled at writing or those who need to communicate complex ideas in a clear and concise manner. In addition, ChatGPT can provide personalized feedback and guidance to meet the user’s knowledge level. Whether the user is a child, a layperson, an undergraduate, or a post-graduate student, the AI chatbot can provide feedback that is tailored to their level of learning. Overall, ChatGPT is a powerful tool that can help users save time and effort when it comes to writing, researching, and organizing information.

The Limitations of ChatGPT

There are several limitations to ChatGPT. While it is capable of accurately predicting text, it is not foolproof and is prone to “hallucinations” where it may confidently provide incorrect information.^{Footnote 16}  That can happen when the input prompt is ambiguous or incomplete, causing the model to generate responses that may not be entirely accurate or relevant. The frequency of hallucinations requires that the user actually understand the content of what is being asked to properly assess whether the response given by ChatGPT is correct. Simply relying on what ChatGPT produces without verifying if the response is accurate or not will lead users to fall victim to these hallucinations.

Another limitation of the AI chatbot is its reliance on existing data (the “Common Crawl” data set) to generate text. This means that the quality of the output depends on the quality and diversity of the data it was trained on. If the data is biased or limited in scope, the model may produce biased or limited responses. Importantly, because of its lack of connection to the internet, it is not able to check live facts, which further limits the responses based on information that remains constant within the original data set.^{Footnote 17}  In addition, unless sufficiently trained through a detailed prompt, ChatGPT is not focused, as it can pull probabilities from all other sources without limitation, making it a black box with sources that cannot be traced or cited and therefore not verified.^{Footnote 18} 

Finally, ChatGPT is not capable of emotional or empathetic responses. It can only generate text based on the patterns it has learned and does not have the ability to truly understand or empathize with the emotions or feelings of the user. Its reliance on large datasets can lead to the perpetuation of preexisting social biases, making it a less-than-ideal tool for engaging in sensitive conversations. That can lead to unfair or inaccurate interpretations of conversations, which can be damaging to individuals or groups who are particularly vulnerable to bias.^{Footnote 19}  OpenAI can attempt to mitigate bias by curating datasets to ensure they are diverse and reflective of a wide range of perspectives. However, it can still be difficult to achieve, as bias can be difficult to identify and remove—in humans and AI. Additionally, simply curating a dataset does not guarantee that bias will be eliminated, as unconscious bias can still exist in the data. As such, it is important to be aware of the limitations of ChatGPT and use it with caution.

THE CURRENT JCSP ASSESSMENT MODEL

The JCSP is a military PME program that provides a portion of the developmental period (DP) 3 requirement to selected lieutenant-commanders and majors within the CAF.^{Footnote 20}  The CFC also hosts the Master of Defence Studies (MDS) graduate program. The MDS is a professional, terminal master’s program offered to qualifying JCSP students that is administered through the Royal Military College of Canada accredited through the Council of Ontario Universities (COU), which sets the standards for the graduate-level learning on MDS courses.^{Footnote 21} 

While the JCSP is fully regulated by the military under the Canadian Defence Academy, the MDS is closely monitored by COU on a consistent basis and is subject to their scrutiny and oversight. All courses offered within the MDS are monitored by the CFC academic faculty and regularly confirmed by the RMC Senate and the Dean of Graduate Studies.^{Footnote 22}  The entire program needs to meet the standards of the COU on Quality Assurance, Internal Quality Assurance Program, to ensure its consistency with provincial graduate-level standards.

The JCSP model of pedagogy draws on both military directing staff (DS), military course development officers (CDO) and academic faculty, all of whom provide oversight over the presented content. Each course is led by a DS, or an academic, or occasionally a partnership of both depending on the subject matter. Courses such as DS555-Leadership and DS556-Command are led by military DS, with some minor academic involvement, while courses such as DS569-International Security and Canadian Foreign Policy are led by academics and administered by the DS.^{Footnote 23}  In developing courses, the DS, CDOs, and academics can shape the topics and the modules as well as the appropriate methods of assessment.

Figure 1 shows the graded assessment methods of a typical JCSP student for JCSP 49 running in 2022–2023. The courses are listed chronologically.

Figure 2 shows the methods again, but as a percentage of overall methods. Written assessments form most of the formally graded assessments for a total of 54 per cent, followed by seminars at 34 per cent and oral simulations and other group projects at 8 per cent and 4 per cent respectively. The author argues (in subsequent sections) that written assignments and seminars are most vulnerable to allowing ChatGPT to complete assignments, thereby threatening the critical thinking end state of the JCSP.

While the CFC has an overarching philosophy of assessment, when evaluating appropriate assessment method for the JCSP and MDS, the CDOs and academics have a large degree of latitude to change the assessment method to meet the required learning outcomes of each course, provided that they maintain the graduate-level standards.^{Footnote 24}  Furthermore, changing the assessment method is a simple change that requires few administrative steps from the faculty. For example, many DS and professors at the CFC have allowed for JCSP students to demonstrate their learning through unconventional assessment methods, such as delivering oral and video presentations or composing podcasts, but as the author noted earlier, these methods account for very few graded assessments (~4 per cent overall). A flexible approach to assessment allows the CFC to remain agile when dealing with disruptive technology such as ChatGPT.

THREATS TO THE CURRENT JCSP ASSESSMENT METHODS

The current PME model is facing a threat in the form of ChatGPT, which has the potential to disrupt conventional education assessment methods of essay writing, seminar preparation and contribution, and operational planning. In particular, ChatGPT’s ability to quickly find facts and synthesize thoughts may undermine the hallmark of modern education: critical thinking and communication skills. These vulnerabilities highlight the need for careful consideration of how technology is integrated into education.

Essay Writing: The End of the Essay?

Some have speculated that ChatGPT will lead to the end of the essay as a primary assessment tool in education.^{Footnote 25}   The purpose of assigning essay writing is not for the value of the final product but for the skills that are developed during the process; these skills include investigating, assessing sources, integrating information, and articulating the found knowledge in a persuasive manner.^{Footnote 26}  ChatGPT can make each of these skills easier. For example, given an adequate prompt, it can produce an essay outline, thesis statement, abstract, and a variety of paragraphs supporting the argument. It can synthesize and summarize rough information into coherent sentences.

It is important to note that students who are unfamiliar with the basic concepts of their topic may be led astray by hallucinations. In this way, it is critical that ChatGPT users have a cursory knowledge of their topic so that they can differentiate accurate answers from hallucinations. This makes ChatGPT more usable for senior undergrad students (third year and beyond) and graduate students who have a foundational knowledge of most concepts, whereas undergraduate students may be unable to correctly identify hallucinations on account of their limited understanding. A student may combat that liability and improve the quality of their prompts by soliciting feedback from their professors and incorporate that feedback to create superior prompts.

Educators fear that students might use the technology to produce an essay that would meet the objectives of the assignment but that they would not have conducted the required critical thought or synthesis, which is the underlying aim of the assignment. Given the advent of the AI chatbot, several post-secondary professors commented that ChatGPT is better-than-average at writing essays.^{Footnote 27}  In a nutshell, it is not so much that the sanctity of the essay be protected but that the skills that are developed through the writing of essays are crucial in developing capable students.

Seminar Preparation and Reading: No Lead-y – No Read-y^{Footnote 28} 

The JCSP students are required to prepare and lead seminar discussions (as seen in Figure 2) once or twice per course (totaling roughly eight throughout the year). This task involves reading the required and supplementary reading lists to ensure that the students can produce high quality questions that evoke class discussion and meet the requirements of the main teaching points and learning objectives. Students are assessed on their ability to lead these discussions and draw out learning objectives within their syndicate.

Much like the essay, the value of leading a seminar is not in the quality of the seminar, but rather the critical thinking and organizational skills that are required in preparing it. When one leads a seminar, they interact with the material in a way that seminar participants do not; the leader dives deeper into the text and is forced to understand it at a higher level. Defeating the very purpose of the assignment, ChatGPT allows for students to bypass the critical thinking involved in these steps. It can summarize entire documents, permitting students to gain insights without reading the document. It can provide transcripts of hours of video and synthesize the script into key points. The AI chatbot can quickly organize and synthesize large amounts of data and create an outline to a presentation that has a logical flow with a detailed time appreciation. It can generate relevant questions and produce high quality answers to those questions. It can also provide counterarguments. It can provide high quality pedagogical advice, including suggesting different types of group activities that will allow students to access learning objectives in creative ways.

ChatGPT can also help students with preparing for seminars they do not lead. JCSP students are expected to provide “participatory contribution” in all seminars. Once the seminar leader has provided the discussion questions (sometimes these are provided in the activity description in the course syllabus), a student can simply query ChatGPT with those questions and, after trialing several prompts, receive quality answers with relevant examples for their discussion within the syndicate. ChatGPT can answer all the questions without the student having to read any documents. Needless to state, this threatens the aim of critical thought and interaction with the material, which is the primary aim of the JCSP.

Operational Planning and War Gaming

ChatGPT can be a valuable tool to assist JCSP students in operational-level planning. With its ability to analyze large amounts of data, the chatbot can help students understand the complexities of the operational environment, including factors such as terrain, population demographics, and social dynamics. That is helpful in the operations planning process (OPP) where JCSP students are expected to read through several hundred pages of background documentation to understand a fictional scenario for Exercise (Ex) PHOENIX THUNDER, Ex PHOENIX RISING, Ex BREAKTHROUGH, and Ex ARCTIC FOX. Where students traditionally are expected to laboriously sift through this documentation, ChatGPT is able to find accurate data connections to form quality deductions for further planning.

Through OPP exercises, ChatGPT can provide insights into the potential outcomes of wargames and offer recommendations for mitigating risks or maximizing opportunities. Furthermore, ChatGPT can support decision-making by providing relevant intelligence and data analysis to inform the development of effective tactics and strategies.

RECOMMENDATIONS

At the time of writing, no policy exists to address the use of ChatGPT or AI technologies within the Canadian Defence Academy (CDA), which holds all the CAF’s PME organizations: the Royal Military College of Canada (RMC), Royal Military College Saint-Jean (RMC Saint-Jean), and the Chief Warrant Officer Robert Osside Profession of Arms Institute. The CDA has initiated a committee of civilian and military professors, advisors, and students from throughout the above organizations to explore this issue and provide a recommended policy in May 2023 for integration into the 2023–2024 academic year.^{Footnote 29}  The author was able to demonstrate some ChatGPT capabilities to the members of the mentioned committee who were at the time beginning to appreciate the potential of the chatbot.

Having demonstrated how ChatGPT might threaten JCSP assessment methods by undermining the goals of the program, the author proposes several recommendations for restructuring the program to incorporate AI tools for the benefit of both students and instructors.

First, the author recommends including an “AI literacy brief” in CF101 for the incoming students, DS, CDOs, and academics that demonstrates the abilities of ChatGPT and AI models, including through a live demonstration. That will expose CFC students and staff to the potential opportunities and threats of ChatGPT. The aim of the brief should be to open up dialogue about the potential of AI chatbots and to inspire trust through transparency. It would allow for the CFC policy to be discussed at length so that the staff and students better understand the technology and the CFC’s policy on assignments.

Second, the CFC should safeguard critical thinking as its fundamental aspiration. Critical thinking is a skill that requires creativity, curiosity, and reflection, and AI chatbot services cannot replicate these qualities. Therefore, DS, CDOs, and academics need to safeguard these skills in the era of ChatGPT by designing assignments that challenge students to think critically and creatively about complex issues. These assignments can include tasks such as comparing different sources of information, explaining reasoning and assumptions, providing alternative solutions or perspectives, or applying existing knowledge to new situations. The CFC should re-evaluate the methods of assessment that can easily be undermined by AI chatbots such as ChatGPT. As previously stated, the CFC allows DS, CDOs, and academics the flexibility to change these methods, provided that they still meet acceptable standards. When requiring long essays, the CFC could employ other parallel assignments that evaluate the student’s depth of knowledge with the subject through oral presentations, elevator pitches, or three-minute thesis, where instructors and course mates could ask follow-up questions.^{Footnote 30}  The gold-standard of this practice is the viva voce examination, where students are questioned on their understanding by a panel of academics. By evaluating a student’s knowledge away from their computer, you test their ability to engage with a topic that is not easily prepared for, gaining a better understanding of their comprehension.

The author recommends adding an assessed viva voce examination to the DS569 Global Vortex activity, where the academic, DS, and peers form a panel to assess the student’s grasp of their topic. The author further recommends that an elevator pitch role play assignment be added to the DS555 Leadership Persuasive Paper to convince a student’s classmates of a solution to their problem. For seminars, the author recommends encouraging students to teach the material to their classmates, instead of orchestrating wide-ranging, and often shallow, discussions. In the author’s experience, DS favour group discussion over deeper engagement with the text from the seminar lead. Teaching requires a deeper level of comprehension that cannot be easily hacked by ChatGPT.

Third, the CFC should embrace ChatGPT and allow students to use the tool, provided that they account for its use. DS and academics can use ChatGPT in the classroom as a tool for sparking discussions and debates among students. Freely using ChatGPT in the classroom will normalize its use, removing the stigma and secrecy surrounding it. DS and academics can use the “flipped classroom method,” which is an instructional technique that has students complete research at home and work on live problem-solving during class time. By changing the traditional testing methodology of lectures in class and written homework at home to lectures and research at home and proctored writing in class, students will be able to focus on the application of the critical thinking skills instead of the writing skills themselves.^{Footnote 31}  DS could assign a complex topic, allowing students to use ChatGPT to quickly research the topic, and then have students present their findings orally in the form of a discussion where they must present real-world examples of their findings without prepared notes.

CONCLUSION

The potential impact of ChatGPT and other AI tools on education cannot be overstated. ChatGPT promotes excitement and apprehension, but it is our duty to balance this response with further study and regulation until we can realize a full picture of its potential. AI technology is neither inherently good nor evil; rather, it is both good and evil. Humans are prone to fearing new technology that changes the status quo. In time, the current fears will subside, and AI will become woven into the fabric of our daily lives.^{Footnote 32}  Until then, it is crucial to remain cautiously optimistic but also adapt to the changes of the technological landscape. While these tools offer unprecedented levels of knowledge-creation and synthesis, there are also significant risks to academic integrity and critical thinking skills, particularly in the context of PME. As such, it is essential to find a balance between technological innovation and academic rigour, through collaborative efforts between students, instructors, and policymakers.

ChatGPT is currently a modern Frankenstein that must be carefully built. Just as Frankenstein’s monster was a creation with immense power that was used for both good and evil, ChatGPT and other AI tools have the potential to revolutionize education. However, they must be developed and regulated with care to ensure that their impact is positive, despite the eventual negative impacts that will occur. It is worthwhile to approach this technology with caution and foresight, recognizing its immense power and potential for both benefit and harm. By doing so, educational institutions can harness the potential of AI to transform education and prepare students for the challenges of the future, while ensuring that the value of critical thinking skills, communication skills and academic integrity is not diminished.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Lieutenant-Colonel Nathan Richards, CD, is currently on the 3rd Canadian Division Staff in Edmonton. He wrote this article as part of the Residential Joint Command and Staff Programme 49 in the spring of 2023. He spent his junior years in Edmonton as a platoon commander, company second-in-command, and battalion operations officer. As a senior officer, he worked mostly in Ontario on the Canadian Army Staff, as officer commanding the Transportation Company in Petawawa, and as G4 of 2 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group. He has deployed on expeditionary tours to Afghanistan and Jordan as well as on countless domestic operations.

This article first appeared in the April, 2024 edition of Canadian Army Journal (20-2).