Aim/Purpose: As industry and higher education are moving to incorporate generative AI into courses and training there is a need to understand how varied the responses are to a series of prompts. This study's purpose was to evaluate the consistency of AI responses to prompts for teaching analytics using a single visualization across several sections of the same course over a week. The students will eventually use the data to create a linear regression model and while the instructor will provide all the necessary knowledge the students will have freedom to engineer new features which may be identified using AI. Background: The use of generative AI is essential for most students. But it can be difficult to know if they are seeing comparable results from a series of complicated prompts, especially as we move up to more advanced topics within a graduate program. Generative AI will usually provide very generic answers as you upload visualizations. But as you begin to ask for information more aligned with your goals your answers could vary depending on the level of personalization, and your results will vary by platform and level of service. Understanding how different responses are is essential as you may want to incorporate a series of prompts that act as a basis for how to explore a figure for specific purposes such as evaluating model assumptions or fit. These prompts can also serve as a basis of motivation to learn additional theory or to critically think about the response that AI has provided. It may also be essential to help students to train their AI to provide prompts expected for the problem. Methodology: We collected information from a follow-along assignment that entailed creating a visualization from a publicly available Kaggle Competition that pertained to BMI, smoking, and insurance charges. The students were instructed to use ChatGpt and to upload the visualization which in general should lead to a generic description of the visualization. The students were then asked to prompt regarding a trend that was notable at a BMI of 30 and then ask ChatGPT for features that they should use for a regression model for calculating insurance charges. The responses were submitted and scored by 2 scorers working independently for among other aspects that the original response noted a trend at 30 BMI, if the difference at 30 BMI was noted correctly in the second prompt, and extent of the features provided in the third prompt. Specifically, we evaluated if the AI noted if there should be an interaction between smoking and BMI, whether BMI should be categorized, and if the model should explore an interaction between BMI as a category and the smoking status. After the assignments were independently scored the reviewers then deconflicted any differences. Contribution: This study shows that there were a wide variety of differences in the responses indicating that instructors need to take the time to evaluate how well students can utilize the technology and how well their AI has been personalized to the task if students are to be evaluated with the same available resources. Findings: The study indicated that most of the students only received a basic response to the original prompt, but a small percentage saw the trend identified before the second prompt. AI correctly identified the trend if specifically prompted with 94% of the responses being suggested to explore a basic interaction between BMI and smoking, 43% to explore categorizing BMI, and only 8% advised to explore an interaction between the categories and the smoking status. Recommendations for Practitioners: Ethical use of AI and the value of prompt engineering is necessary in today’s environment. We evaluate how well an assignment given over two weeks would provide consistent results. With the results suggesting a wide variety of responses, educators and trainers need to ensure that students can come to comparable results. This may require more prompting for some students and may also require taking additional time to help some students to train their AI to provide results in the manner needed for the problem. Recommendations for Researchers: More work needs to be done to continue to evaluate different AI platforms and personalization to ensure that educational research done on AI is being performed in a comparable manner. There is a need to make sure that interventions or suggested use of AI is conducted with students having equitable resources. Impact on Society: The use of AI is quickly becoming a requirement for many individuals to perform at work. Evaluating and determining how students with diverse backgrounds can obtain equitable results from the system is important. Future Research: More research needs to be done across platforms. More research is needed to evaluate a balance in generative AI use and the ability to maintain material into memory and critical thinking. Studies should be undertaken to evaluate if student’s perception of theory or learning specific technologies or concepts are changed as they are exposed to diverse ways to prompt AI and the responses generated.

Aim/Purpose. Early identification of students at risk of not achieving course learning objectives enables instructors to intervene earlier to help students succeed. One of the first student course engagement activities is registration. This study aims to determine if registration timing correlates with student success in an online STEM course. Background. Student success is based on achieving course learning outcomes. Students who register very late may have a lower probability of successfully passing challenging courses, adversely impacting student retention. Earlier instructor intervention with at-risk students may improve student academic achievement. Methodology. This study analyzed historical data of 193 student numerical course scores and registration timings for a recently updated introductory management information systems and data analysis course at a university in the south-east United States. The course was delivered online over nine-week periods, by two different instructors, over two calendar years comprising one academic year. The response variable, overall course score, was evaluated based on the student’s course registration timing relative to the course start date. Contribution. We examined the relationship between registration timing relative to course start date and academic performance as measured by overall course score and letter grade. At a statistically significant level, we found that students who registered very late earned, on average, one letter grade lower than students that registered earlier in the registration window. Findings. The analysis reveals that registration timing correlates to course scores. Also, 45% of students that registered after the course start date failed the course, and the overall course scores of late registrants were lower, indicating that very late registration may identify at-risk students. Recommendations for Practitioners. For students, carefully consider the decision to register for a STEM course late and understand why you delayed registering. Can you purchase the text and access codes to catch up on the first week’s assignments? Will you have the time to work harder in the first few weeks of the course to catch up? For instructors, be aware that students that register late for a course are at risk of not doing well and intervene if you observe the student falling behind the rest of the class or not engaging with the course. Administrators should carefully consider policies allowing late registration for STEM courses and its effects on student success and retention. What might seem like a promising idea in the short term (allowing a student to register late) may have deleterious long-term effects on student success and retention. Recommendation for Researchers. Researchers may consider the relationship between course registration timing and learning outcomes. Additional data collection on registration timings and course outcomes combined with data collected from students through surveys could shed light on the decision-making behavior of students that register for courses late in the registration window. Impact on Society. Improved student academic performance enables better use of academic resources. Students with higher academic performance qualify for scholarships, internships, and better job opportunities. For teachers, less time spent on low-performing students allows the instructor to challenge students academically to achieve higher levels of understanding. Finally, universities may enjoy higher student retention, and society will benefit from better use of financial resources dedicated to higher education. Future Research. Expanding the dataset to include other schools, courses, and learning modalities may provide additional insight into students’ registration behavior. Research on intervention strategies’ effectiveness based on student characteristics could be beneficial. Additional research on factors affecting students’ course registration decision-making process is required. Finally, a longitudinal study considering student registration timing throughout a degree program could identify chronic late registration behavior. Further study of the relationship between late registration and degree completion could provide valuable insights.

Aim/Purpose The purpose of this paper is to address the issue of gaps in students’ knowledge at the time they enter a comprehensive Information Systems capstone course. This problem of knowledge gaps was exacerbated by the forced remote learning and isolation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim was to find a technique that would identify and fill those gaps. Ideally, the method would also reinforce the students’ interpersonal soft skills. Background Many universities have a capstone course where students may apply their knowledge from the curriculum to a project, and they are evaluated on their retention of knowledge from the core classes. Over the past two years, students have experienced course interruptions and modifications due to the pandemic, resulting in learning gaps on topics covered in the core courses. Depending on the project’s scope and curriculum, this may prevent students from conversing on many essential concepts during the capstone course. By requiring students to create “Teach Back” tutorials on materials from their core courses, faculty may ensure that the key concepts are discussed multiple times within the curriculum. Methodology We present a case study to identify key concepts and compare cohort results before and after implementation. Contribution A process for identifying potential knowledge gaps is identified, and a method to repeatedly expose students to concepts is introduced. Findings There were improvements to the overall capstone scores after the tutorial implementation. While many factors influence changes in scores across cohorts, the initial findings are promising, supporting the concept that teaching back helps to close knowledge gaps. Recommendations for Practitioners Faculty should collaborate to identify knowledge areas that need to be reinforced later in their students’ academic careers. Teaching back essential concepts that may not be prioritized in implementing a capstone project ensures a repeated exposure to the identified concepts. Recommendations for Researchers There needs to be a priority to teach students to be lifelong learners and to teach the skills needed to share their knowledge with future coworkers. There needs to be more research into a pedagogy that builds these essential soft skills within our curriculum. Finally, research into alumni feedback on course topics and pedagogy is needed. Impact on Society Introducing pedagogy that improves both knowledge and soft skills, this research looks to build individuals who will learn independently and be able to communicate with and improve others. Future Research There needs to be additional research to study the changes in technical knowledge before and after Teach Back, the consequences of elective sequencing, the consideration of elective versus required courses, and the use of Teach Back to capture student knowledge gained from completing diverse electives prior to the capstone course.

Aim/Purpose: Business analytics is a cross-functional field that is important to implement for a college and has emerged as a critically important core component of the business curriculum. It is a difficult task due to scheduling concerns and limits to faculty and student resources. This paper describes the process of creating a central video repository to serve as a platform for just in time teaching and the impact on student learning outcomes. Background: Industry demand for employees with analytical knowledge, skills, and abilities requires additional analytical content throughout the college of business curriculum. This demand needs other content to be added to ensure that students have the prerequisite skills to complete assignments. Two pedagogical approaches to address this issue are Just-in-Time Teaching (JiTT) and scaffolding, grounded in the Vygoskian concept of “Zone of Proximal Development. Methodology: This paper presents a case study that applies scaffolding and JiTT teaching to create a video repository to add business analytics instruction to a curriculum. The California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) and Major Field Test (MFT) scores were analyzed to assess learning outcomes. Student and faculty comments were considered to inform the results of the review. Contribution: This paper demonstrates a practical application of scaffolding and JiTT theory by outlining the process of using a video library to provide valuable instructional resources that support meaningful learning, promote student academic achievement, and improve program flexibility. Findings: A centrally created library is a simple and inexpensive way to provide business analytics course content, augmenting standard content delivery. Assessment of learning scores showed an improvement, and a summary of lessons learned is provided to guide implications. Recommendations for Practitioners: Pedagogical implications of this research include the observation that producing a central library of instructor created videos and assignments can help address knowledge and skills gaps, augment the learning of business analytics content, and provide a valuable educational resource throughout the college of business curriculum. Recommendation for Researchers: This paper examines the use of scaffolding and JiTT theories. Additional examination of these theories may improve the understanding and limits of these concepts as higher education evolves due to the combination of market forces changing the execution of course delivery. Impact on Society: Universities are tasked with providing new and increasing skills to students while controlling the costs. A centrally created library of instructional videos provides a means of delivering meaningful content while controlling costs. Future Research: Future research may examine student success, including the immediate impact of videos and longitudinally using video repositories throughout the curriculum. Studies examining the approach across multiple institutions may help to evaluate the success of video repositories. Faculty acceptance of centrally created video libraries and assignments should be considered for the value of faculty recruiting and use in the classroom. The economic impact on both the university and students should be evaluated.

Trust continues to be a major focus of information systems research as technology pushes further into both our personal and professional lives. However, little attention has been paid to how personal use of technology influences professional trust in its value for modern business processes such as business analytics activities. We conduct an empirical study to examine whether emotional trust formed by personal use of technology impacts workplace trust in business analytics activities. In the context of personal use of social media technology, we examine trust as an antecedent to adoption and look at whether trust in social media will lead to a perceived relative advantage for its use in business analytics processes. Our findings suggest that personal use-based emotional trust influences the trust in social media-based business analytics processes. Additionally, we find evidence suggesting that trust towards social media communities affect the perceived advantage of using social media in analytics.

Making data-driven decisions is becoming more important for organizations faced with confusing and often contradictory information available to them from their operating environment. This article examines one college of business' journey of developing a data-driven decision-making mindset within its undergraduate curriculum. Lessons learned may be of use to other institutions of higher education that are implementing courses with business intelligence (BI) and business analytics (BA) content to provide students with the knowledge and skills they need to excel in a challenging career environment.

IT consumerization has brought social media (SM) and personal mobile devices into many workplaces. This has prompted researchers to examine the benefits and risks of this trend. However, little research has examined how personal experiences with technology such as social media may affect decision making on the job. This study examines the potential impact of individuals' trusting beliefs (competence, benevolence, and integrity) regarding algorithms and social media communities (SMC) on initial trust in SM-based business analytics (BA), as well as on relative advantage over non-SM based BA. Study results suggested that the initial trust was influenced by the belief in the competency of personal algorithms as well as trust in SMC. It also indicates that increased trust in SMC influences relative advantage. Implications and suggestions for further research are discussed.

Introduction Pork production has seen a period of volatility that it has not seen before. During this period, there has been a rise in a number of issues. Pork producers must deal with narrowing margins, environmental issues, animal welfare issues, integration, and slaughter capacity concerns. These issues have been shaping the industry and will continue to shape the industry. This has increased the importance of production system selection for finishing market hogs. A main focus of this paper is on identifying the economic factors which impact the profitability of alternative pork production systems. There are many varied types of facilities used in pork production. They range from totally confined environmentally controlled systems to outdoor pasture systems. Moreover, there is a wide range of systems between these two. Examples would include partial confinement and hoop facilities. There are tradeoffs between systems. Totally confined systems are capital intensive but typically have better feed efficiency. Costs referred to as fixed costs such as depreciation, interest, etc. are higher while operating costs or variable costs such as feed are lower. Hoop type systems have lower capital requirements but factors such as feed efficiency are typically not as good. This system has lower fixed costs and higher operating (variable) costs. This paper will provide an economic analysis of confinement and hoop pork production systems. It will identify economic factors that differ between systems. These differences can lead to different production decisions for pork production systems under similar economic conditions.

An issue that has received attention in the livestock industry is that of air quality/odor. An Iowa pork producer survey showed that about two-thirds of the respondents felt air quality/odor was an issue that needed evaluation. This report is aimed at developing a baseline of air quality/odor control measures currently in use by Iowa pork producers. Information is obtained on use of selected odor control technologies and user level of satisfaction. Two survey methods were utilized; a mail survey and a telephone survey. The telephone survey followed the mail survey and was used to test the representativeness of the mail survey respondents and obtain information on why selected odor control technologies were not used. Level of use and level of satisfaction with selected odor control methods varied. A deep pit was used by 77 percent of the respondents. About seven-in-ten injected manure. About half of the respondents immediately incorporated manure. One-half composted pig mortalities. About four-in-ten had a windbreak, used manure additives, and/or had a bedded system somewhere in the production system. Level of satisfaction was high for windbreaks, bedded systems, bio-covers, deep pits, composting pigs/manure, and incorporating manure. Satisfaction was low for bio-filters, ozone, manure storage plastic covers, and manure additives. Reasons why odor control technologies were not used varied. A dominant reason was that the technology was not applicable to the production facility. For example, a biocover, plastic cover, etc. would not be applicable for a deep pit manure storage system. Another response for nonadoption of some technologies was that odors are managed sufficiently already. This was related to the response for building odors. About one-third of the respondents indicated they did not use selected building odor control technologies because they were too expensive and/or they were not familiar with the technology. Responses for not using modified diets and/or manure additives included too expensive, not effective for odor control, and not familiar with the technology. This survey shows that swine producers are using a wide variety of techniques to minimize off-site odor and air quality effects. The most common type of manure storage used is deep pits (68 percent of producers) followed by solid manure systems (20 percent). While a large number of technologies are available, none provides a perfect solution to air quality.

As part of a pork producer odor survey conducted in 2002, respondents were asked to provide information on things they were doing to improve neighbor relations. The open-ended question provided a wide range of responses. It was evident that many producers are working with neighbors to better inform them about their pork production operation and when they may be doing activities such as applying manure, etc. Primary items producers are doing to improve neighbor relations are communication, treating them with respect, and considering weather before applying manure. This would include wind direction, air temperature, etc. Another grouping of items included manure application timing, providing pork/gifts, keeping facilities and landscaping looking nice, and facility location or siting. Producers do things to improve neighbor relations. About 30 percent indicated they check the weather before deciding to apply manure; and/or they communicate with the neighbors informing them when manure will be applied. Another one-in-six respondents indicated they use landscaping around the facility to improve its appearance.

From June 30, 1998, to February 21, 2001, a study to compare swine production facility types was conducted at the Iowa State University Rhodes Research and Demonstration. The two types of pork grow-finish production facilities compared in this study were hoop and total confinement. This report summarizes results from six groups of hogs; three groups fed in during the winter and three groups fed during the summer. The trial showed some large differences between the seasons. The hoop facilities showed an advantage of $1.43 per hog net income over the confinement facility during the summer (Table 2), whereas the confinement facility showed a $6.93 per hog net income advantage during the winter (Table 4). The result is a year round advantage of $2.75 per hog for the confinement hogs (Table 6). The difference is a function of overall production and marketing advantages that the confinement showed during the trial. The production differences were large enough that the confinement facility offset the higher initial investment through lower variable costs. The confinement facility also had a significant advantage in marketing with almost a full percent advantage in yield and a lean premium of $.24 per hundred weight over the hoop facilities. The trial also suggested that the hoop facilities had more variability. This may be due to their increased susceptibility to environmental conditions.

The study was conducted at the ISU Rhodes Research and Demonstration farm. The two types of pork grow-finish production facilities compared in this study are hoop and total confinement. This is the eighth group of finishing pigs that has been evaluated in these facilities and the forth summer group. This study was conducted from April 2001 to September 2001. Past reports examined the differences between the two facility types to evaluate facility performance under summer and winter seasons. This report similarly examines the difference between the two facility types. An additional focus of this group is pig stocking density rates. Stocking rates of 9, 10.5, and 12 square feet per pig are evaluated for the hoop system. Net revenue per pig for the hoop systems were $19.79 (12 square feet), $22.41 (10.5 square feet), and $17.74 (9 square feet), respectively. The net revenue per pig for the confinement system was $16.25 per pig. The hoop facilities showed a dramatic drop in production efficiency when the facilities were stocked at a rate of 9 square feet per pig. The feed conversion increased nearly a tenth of a pound of feed per pound of gain and the average daily gain decreased by .6 pounds per day compared with the other stocking densities. However, feed efficiency and average daily gain only improved slightly when the space allowed per pig was 12 square feet compared with 10.5 square feet. Moreover, the reduction in space per pig from 12 to 10.5 square feet allowed a more efficient use of both facilities and bedding per pig. This allowed the group stocked at 10.5 square feet per pig to increase net revenue by $2.62 per pig over the hoop stocked at 12 square feet per pig. This difference is impacted somewhat by a difference in the weight of the pigs that were marketed (Table 1). They were on feed for a slightly longer time period. Despite this difference in sale weight the study suggests that a decrease in space utilized from 12 to 10.5 square feet per pig would increase the profit level for hoop facilities during the summer. Net revenue for the hogs from the hoop facility with 12 square feet of space was $3.54 per pig over the confinement system. This difference was greater than the average of the three previous summer groups, which favored the hoops by $1.43 and saw a difference in hoop net revenue vs. confinement net revenue that ranged from $.20 to $3.05 per pig. The range of differences can be explained by a number of reasons. Some can be attributed to on farm research variables such as weather and disease exposure. Another key issue is the distribution of marketing. This changes the performance of the remaining hogs as well as the average sale weight

The two types of pork grow-finish production facilities compared in this study are hoop and total confinement. Results of this study, which was conducted from September 27, 2000 until February 21, 2001 showed profit to be $9.26 per pig greater for the confinement-raised pigs. This study represents the seventh group of pigs finished at the pig research facilities at the Iowa State University Rhodes Research Farm. The profit difference experienced with this group was the largest experienced to date. An important issue with this group was that extreme weather conditions prevented marketing the pigs at optimal times. Neither system’s pigs could be sold at the proper time because of extreme cold and heavy snow. Moreover, the hoop pigs were placed on feed over a three week period but were all sold on the same day (Table 2) causing a wide range in market weight and a disparagement of premiums. Additionally, the weather was more severe during this trial than with any of the previous trials. The daily highs and lows during December 2000 averaged 15 and 12 degrees, respectively, below the 50-year averages for the area. The lower fixed cost advantage of the hoops was offset by the significantly higher variable input needs such as feed and bedding. Results of this group point out the importance of management and weather in determining the profit differences between the two systems. Average daily gain and feed efficiency has constantly been lower for the hoopraised pigs for the winter trials. However, the difference for this trial was much more dramatic. The extreme weather conditions were likely a major contributor. The hoop pigs expended far more energy in keeping warm. This points out the importance of weather in production systems which have limited control on air temperature and flow.

Introduction Organic pork production is a relatively small but growing market. It represents a market that is showing rapid growth. Relatively little is known about resource needs for organic pork production. Moreover, organic pork production has seasonal production problems where it is more difficult to keep pigs alive during winter farrowing. There are pressures for seasonal production of organic pork and only farrowing pigs when it is easiest to save the pigs. However, this system creates an uneven labor need problem as well as flow of fresh organic pork. This report evaluates pig flow and labor needs for two organic pork production systems. One system is a seasonal organic pork production system, whereas the other system is a continuous organic pork production system. The continuous farrowing system has six groups of females with each farrowed two times per year. Farrowing occurs each month. The seasonal system has spring and summer farrowing only. Farrowing occurs in April, June/July, and September. One group is farrowed in April and again in September/October. The other group is farrowed in June/July. The April and September farrowings are sows retained from the June/July gilt farrowings of the prior year. The seasonal system has two groups of 80 females, whereas the continuous system has six groups of 27 females each. This report describes the flow of pigs through the two systems, the breeding herd that is required for each system, and how the two systems work. Pig marketing and labor distributions also are provided for each system.

The two types of pork grow-finish production facilities compared in this study are hoop and total confinement. Results of this study, a summer group, was conducted from April 18, 2000 until September 22, 2000 showed net revenue to be $1.69 per pig greater for the hoop raised pigs. This is the sixth group of finishing pigs, which has been evaluated in these facilities. This group was typical of the previous summer groups with the lower fixed cost advantage that the hoops have being partially offset by higher variable input needs such as feed and bedding. Production values were similar between the two systems with the hoops having a slight advantage in average daily gain but a slight disadvantage in feed conversion.

Introduction Organic pork production is a relatively new and expanding segment of the pork industry. Similar to some other niche markets, it has experienced a relatively rapid growth during recent years. It is well known that cost of organic pork production is greater than traditional pork production due to increased feed costs and decreased swine performance. The industry has dealt with this by paying premiums to producers who produce the product. However, it is not clear on what levels or how the premiums should be paid to give producers an incentive to provide a steadier product flow throughout the year. With premium structures currently used for organic pork there are more hogs being produced using summer farrowing than by winter farrowing. This uneven pig flow causes an instability of supply and product flow problems throughout the industry. This instability can lead to problems of slaughter capacity scheduling utilization as the industry grows and matures. Also, at certain time periods the demand for fresh organic pork products may not be met. During other times, the availability of fresh organic pork may exceed demand. These issues create problems for a developing industry, which is attempting to establish and maintain a reliable consumer base. The objective of this report is to evaluate alternative premium payments and structures for organic pork production. Structured properly, premiums provide adequate incentives for increased winter farrowing and a more even flow of fresh pork products available to consumers throughout the year. This report addresses the issue by examining the increase of costs involved in expanding a seasonal (summer only farrowing) organic pork production system to continuous production of organic hogs. A seasonal and a continuous system of production are used to provide a basis to determine cost differences between the two types of production systems. It is also necessary to examine the production cost differences between the summer and winter periods of a continuous system to establish a basis for differences in premiums paid between winter and summer farrowed hogs. The final issue addressed is a comparison of premium payment alternatives.