The Daily Orange on Wednesday published a report about a list of formal complaints of sexual misconduct made by students at Syracuse University over a four-year span.

Here’s how The D.O. performed its analysis of the data:

The list was recently filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York as a six-page PDF, which later was converted into an Excel file.

The D.O. then made several editorial decisions on what cases to exclude from its final report. 

When calculating the number of formal complaints to use in its analysis, The D.O. opted to exclude the one complaint of “Discrimination/Assault (non-sexual)” on the list because, even though it was listed as a formal complaint of sexual misconduct, it was also reportedly “non-sexual” in nature.

The D.O. also decided to exclude the one complaint of “Gender Bias” because the team decided that there was likely more than one gender bias incident brought before a University Conduct Board between the 2013-14 academic year and the 2016-17 academic year and it was also not immediately clear why the complaint was included on the list and considered to be sexual misconduct.

In one case, three women filed a formal complaint of sexual harassment against both a man and an unnamed fraternity chapter at SU. One of the respondents received disciplinary probation and the other was suspended. The D.O. excluded this complaint because it was not clear who received what sanction.

The initial allegations of two other complaints were listed as “N/A.” Those complaints were also excluded.

That’s why The D.O. only factored 71 formal complaints of sexual misconduct into its analysis when, on the original list, there was a total of 76 formal complaints.

One complaint of “Sexual Assault/Harassment” was included in The D.O.’s sexual assault-specific category of complaints. One complaint of “Sexual Harassment/Voyeurism,” one complaint of “Sexual Harassment/Hostile Environment” and three complaints of “Sexual Harassment/Stalking” were included in The D.O.’s sexual harassment-specific category of complaints.

For The D.O.’s calculations of how many students on the list received sanctions of disciplinary probation or disciplinary reprimand, the team did not factor in one complaint during which a single respondent received disciplinary probation through “informal resolution.” The respondent was eventually expelled after a “Board hearing” in the same case.

When determining the percent of women who filed complaints against men, The D.O. excluded the following cases:

• The “Discrimination/Assault (non-sexual)” complaint
• The “Gender Bias” complaint
• The complaint that involved a fraternity chapter
• The two “N/A” complaints

When determining the percent of students who were found fully or partially responsible for alleged Code of Student Conduct violations, The D.O. excluded the following cases:

• The “Discrimination/Assault (non-sexual)” complaint
• The “Gender Bias” complaint
• The complaint that involved a fraternity chapter
• The two “N/A” complaints
• Two complaints that resulted in no finding(s) of responsibility and no adjudication decision(s) because the respondent(s) had already been expelled due to a prior hearing
• One complaint in which there was “insufficient cause” to proceed with charges/no finding(s) of responsibility

The same method was used to calculate the percent of students who were found fully not responsible of alleged violations.

Published on October 16, 2019 at 10:06 pm

Contact Sam: sfogozal@syr.edu | @SamOgozalek