Lesson plan · 50–60 minutes
Lesson plan: transparency and users
A debate-centred lesson on the user's right to know: when disclosure is owed, what it fixes, and — the productive part — what it does not fix.
01Audience, duration, objectives
- Target audience — secondary (14+); works well with younger groups than the other plans
- Duration — 50–60 minutes
- Objectives — students can say when AI interaction must be disclosed, argue both the value and the limits of disclosure, and connect transparency to their own digital habits
- Preparation — review transparency obligations; queue the game's chatbot case
02Lesson flow
- Provocation (10') — "You chatted with your city's helpdesk for 20 minutes. It was a bot. Does it matter?" Quick poll, three reasons per side on the board.
- The rule (10') — when the AI Act requires disclosure (chatbots, synthetic content); why the remedy here is honesty rather than heavy engineering.
- Debate (20') — motion: "A clear 'this is AI' label solves the problem." Two teams, structured turns; the teacher's role is to inject the hard cases (vulnerable users, viral deepfakes, reliance).
- Game verification (10') — play "The desk that always answers" together: does the class's debate position survive the case's evidence?
03Assessment and reflection
One-paragraph position: "A label is enough when … and not enough when …". Look for answers that name reliance or vulnerability — that is the lesson landing.
04Extension
Run the transparency hunt from the activities page as homework, reporting findings next lesson. Related background: digital citizenship and AI regulation.