IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/aaeatr/377655.html

Generative AI in Higher Education: Analyzing Adoption Patterns and Perceptions in Agriculture and Natural Resources Courses

Author

Listed:
  • Thapa, Bhawna
  • Russell, Aaron
  • Joshi, Omkar

Abstract

This study investigates empirical data on how students and educators perceive the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in agriculture and natural resources (ANR) courses. By surveying participants at a land-grant university, the research explores how different educational backgrounds and sociodemographic factors influence attitudes toward AI adoption. The findings reveal that less than half of the respondents currently use generative AI, with significantly lower usage among first-year and rural students. Key drivers encouraging AI adoption include perceived academic benefits, ease of use, and familiarity with the technology. In contrast, barriers such as concerns about reliability, potential misuse, and information overload deter usage. Seniors and graduate students are more likely to embrace generative AI tools, whereas older and rural students show lower adoption rates. The Analytical Hierarchical Process underscores the necessity for tailored strategies to address specific concerns like inaccurate information and how to leverage AI's advantages, such as streamlining tasks for instructors and providing grammar assistance for students. Future course curricula and institutional policies should incorporate targeted training and additional support to meet specific educational needs, thereby enhancing learning outcomes and ensuring equitable access to the benefits of generative AI tools.

Suggested Citation

  • Thapa, Bhawna & Russell, Aaron & Joshi, Omkar, 2025. "Generative AI in Higher Education: Analyzing Adoption Patterns and Perceptions in Agriculture and Natural Resources Courses," Applied Economics Teaching Resources (AETR), Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 7(4), August.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaeatr:377655
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/377655/files/AETR_2025_0240%20Final.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Efthymios Constantinides & Marc C. Zinck Stagno, 2011. "Potential of the social media as instruments of higher education marketing: a segmentation study," Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 7-24, March.
    2. Valentin Kuleto & Milena Ilić & Mihail Dumangiu & Marko Ranković & Oliva M. D. Martins & Dan Păun & Larisa Mihoreanu, 2021. "Exploring Opportunities and Challenges of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Higher Education Institutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-16, September.
    3. Madjid Tavana & Mehdi Soltanifar & Francisco J. Santos-Arteaga, 2023. "Analytical hierarchy process: revolution and evolution," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 879-907, July.
    4. Masozera, Michel K. & Alavalapati, Janaki R.R. & Jacobson, Susan K. & Shrestha, Ram K., 2006. "Assessing the suitability of community-based management for the Nyungwe Forest Reserve, Rwanda," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 206-216, March.
    5. House, Lisa & Weldon, Richard & Wysocki, Allen, 2007. "Student Perceptions of Online Distance Education in Undergraduate Agricultural Economic Programs," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(2), pages 275-284, August.
    6. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    7. Morley, Jessica & Machado, Caio C.V. & Burr, Christopher & Cowls, Josh & Joshi, Indra & Taddeo, Mariarosaria & Floridi, Luciano, 2020. "The ethics of AI in health care: A mapping review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    8. Matteo Brunelli & Luisa Canal & Michele Fedrizzi, 2013. "Inconsistency indices for pairwise comparison matrices: a numerical study," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 211(1), pages 493-509, December.
    9. Garbuzova-Schlifter, Maria & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "AHP-based risk analysis of energy performance contracting projects in Russia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 559-581.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kun Chen & Gang Kou & J. Michael Tarn & Yan Song, 2015. "Bridging the gap between missing and inconsistent values in eliciting preference from pairwise comparison matrices," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 235(1), pages 155-175, December.
    2. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    3. Ho, William, 2008. "Integrated analytic hierarchy process and its applications - A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 211-228, April.
    4. Li, Kevin W. & Wang, Zhou-Jing & Tong, Xiayu, 2016. "Acceptability analysis and priority weight elicitation for interval multiplicative comparison matrices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 628-638.
    5. Grošelj, Petra & Hodges, Donald G. & Zadnik Stirn, Lidija, 2016. "Participatory and multi-criteria analysis for forest (ecosystem) management: A case study of Pohorje, Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 80-86.
    6. Perdana, Arif & Arifin, Saru & Quadrianto, Novi, 2025. "Algorithmic trust and regulation: Governance, ethics, legal, and social implications blueprint for Indonesia's central banking," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    7. Paul Thaddeus Kazibudzki, 2016. "An examination of performance relations among selected consistency measures for simulated pairwise judgments," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 244(2), pages 525-544, September.
    8. Tahseen, Samiha & Karney, Bryan, 2017. "Opportunities for increased hydropower diversion at Niagara: An sSWOT analysis," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 757-770.
    9. Liu Fang & Peng Yanan & Zhang Weiguo & Pedrycz Witold, 2017. "On Consistency in AHP and Fuzzy AHP," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 128-147, April.
    10. Jiří Mazurek & Konrad Kulakowski, 2020. "Information gap in value propositions of business models of language schools," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 30(2), pages 77-89.
    11. Hocine, Amine & Kouaissah, Noureddine, 2020. "XOR analytic hierarchy process and its application in the renewable energy sector," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    12. Liu, Guiwen & Zheng, Saina & Xu, Pengpeng & Zhuang, Taozhi, 2018. "An ANP-SWOT approach for ESCOs industry strategies in Chinese building sectors," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 90-99.
    13. Achabou, Mohamed Akli, 2008. "Strategic Decision Criteria in an Emergent Company Confronted to Important Institutional Changes," 110th Seminar, February 18-22, 2008, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 49764, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Pietro Amenta & Alessio Ishizaka & Antonio Lucadamo & Gabriella Marcarelli & Vijay Vyas, 2020. "Computing a common preference vector in a complex multi-actor and multi-group decision system in Analytic Hierarchy Process context," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 284(1), pages 33-62, January.
    15. José María Codosero Rodas & José Cabezas Fernández & José Manuel Naranjo Gómez & Rui Alexandre Castanho, 2019. "Risk Premium Assessment for the Sustainable Valuation of Urban Development Land: Evidence from Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-21, August.
    16. Jiří Mazurek, 2018. "Some notes on the properties of inconsistency indices in pairwise comparisons," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 28(1), pages 27-42.
    17. Haque, H.M. Enamul & Dhakal, Shobhakar & Mostafa, S.M.G., 2020. "An assessment of opportunities and challenges for cross-border electricity trade for Bangladesh using SWOT-AHP approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    18. Alessio Ishizaka & Sajid Siraj, 2020. "Interactive consistency correction in the analytic hierarchy process to preserve ranks," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 43(2), pages 443-464, December.
    19. Kajanus, Miika & Leskinen, Pekka & Kurttila, Mikko & Kangas, Jyrki, 2012. "Making use of MCDS methods in SWOT analysis—Lessons learnt in strategic natural resources management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 1-9.
    20. Lee, Seungbum & Walsh, Patrick, 2011. "SWOT and AHP hybrid model for sport marketing outsourcing using a case of intercollegiate sport," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 361-369.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaeatr:377655. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.