Cal-state: northridge registration game.

[Husar]

Alternatively the professor is wrong, lying, or being misrepresented. Seeing as the writer of the article did not provide the sources that the professor used to gain those conclusions we would have to go out of our way to find them to determine if he is correct, which, as the presenter of him as evidence, would be your job.

And maybe the government is lying in the reports that show a decline in cases.
Your insinuation that I should check all FBI reports myself and spend several months crunching the data is quite hilarious.
If you want to accuse the professor of lying, the burden of proof is on you, remember?

I dont see on the report what these questions were or and how they decided which were healthy or unhealthy beyond the conclusions they made.

You wanted professionals to do the jopb on campuses with professional oversight and now you criticize the work of all the professionals who have apparently tried to investigate the issue.

And the table:
[table]

It's split between male and female and segmented along school year, ethnicity, student type, each having a before and after and it shows that in all cases it shows that the before dwarfs the after. There's no indication of which set it each statment is from, maybe it's all compiled?

Frankly, I have no idea how the report came to these conclusions with so little evidence shown.

Since the before number increases from freshman to graduate for the most part, it might just indicate the increase of cases on campuses.

Your view is stated in this report, but not proven.

I said it supports my view, not that it proves anything.

All that seems to be probable from the evidence provided is that out of an estimated (66% freshmen of the whole 530000 students equals 369600, multiplied by the 5 presented catagories of university year)=1,848,000, a sample of 281,000 students have an admittal rate (that being admitting to suffering sexual violence after starting thier university year) at an average of (combined "after" of 117 divided by the number of imdividual "after" of 52) =2.25%.

If we take that as an accurate indication of the whole, which I am highly averse to doing so due to lack of information, we can conclude that 2.25% of the student body were willing to admit to being sexually assaulted in college during the 4-6 week period. A massive departure from the previously presented 1 in 5 of all female studenst are sexually assaulted, and a small legitimising of the assumption that there was a fall between 1997 and now.

I'm not sure what you calculated there but it cannot be correct:

Our data suggest that nearly 1 in every 30 first-year female students have indicated being victimized before taking their first midterm exam.

One in 30 is already 3.3% and that's only before the midterms. They also say it's lower than the 14% of the other report.

The argument is of it's need, my opinion is irrelevant and your proof insufficient to prove that the police methods already used are ineffective enough to warrant introducing further methods from third parties.

Oh, you want ineffective police measures: http://www.ccasa.org/wp-content/uplo...al-Assault.pdf

The scourge of sexual assault continues to afflict university campuses across the nation. Though the vast majority of victims are female, women are generally woefully underrepresented in campus law enforcement agencies. We do not argue, however, that the ranks of women in theseagencies should be increased simply for the sake of attaining a more demographically reflective police force as an end in itself. Rather, we assert that a demonstrableconnection exists between the disproportionately low number of women among campus police and the troublingly low reporting rates for sexual assault, and that these chronically low rates in turn severely impair universities’ ability to grapple with this crime.

[Greyblades]

And maybe the government is lying in the reports that show a decline in cases.
Your insinuation that I should check all FBI reports myself and spend several months crunching the data is quite hilarious.
If you want to accuse the professor of lying, the burden of proof is on you, remember?

Who do you trust? The government gave you a detailed description of what it did to come to it's conclusions and gave us summaries of the evidence it gathered for us to check if we wish, he hasnt provided any beyond "The guy saying it is a professor".

You wanted professionals to do the jopb on campuses with professional oversight and now you criticize the work of all the professionals who have apparently tried to investigate the issue.

Well, you're going to have to prove that this is professional as it's lack of transparancy indicates it is isnt.

Since the before number increases from freshman to graduate for the most part, it might just indicate the increase of cases on campuses.

How did you come to that conclusion? From the data it provided or just because it said it?

I said it supports my view, not that it proves anything.

I got that impression. Any idea where the data it is based off is or can I dismiss this completely?

I'm not sure what you calculated there but it cannot be correct:

I calculated the after's mean (average). The before includes thier entire life before they arrived on campus, the after includes only after they joined the university. Check for yourself.

One in 30 is already 3.3% and that's only before the midterms. They also say it's lower than the 14% of the other report.

They say many things, but they provide nothing to support it.

Oh, you want ineffective police measures: http://www.ccasa.org/wp-content/uplo...al-Assault.pdf

Hmm...

According to research, nearly one in five women (18.3%) and one in seventy-one men (1.4%) have been raped.12

There's that 1 in 5 again.

Where does it get that number from...

12 D.KELLY WEISBERG,DOMESTIC VIOLENCE:LEGAL AND SOCIAL REALITY 30 (2012)

Does that mean this:http://www.amazon.com/Domestic-Viole.../dp/0735508631

Well that's $200 of unhelpful.

[Husar]

Who do you trust? The government gave you a detailed description of what it did to come to it's conclusions and gave us summaries of the evidence it gathered for us to check if we wish, he hasnt provided any beyond "The guy saying it is a professor".

The method is described and the results summarized, there might be more in the magazine where it was originally published but I wouldn't know how to get that.

Well, you're going to have to prove that this is professional as it's lack of transparancy indicates it is isnt. [...]
How did you come to that conclusion? From the data it provided or just because it said it? [...]
I got that impression. Any idea where the data it is based off is or can I dismiss this completely?

You can dismiss this completely and believe that your government report is the absolute certain truth in numbers because it is so transparent.

I calculated the after's mean (average). The before includes thier entire life before they arrived on campus, the after includes only after they joined the university. Check for yourself.

Yes, one more reason to make people play the game even before college.

Well that's $200 of unhelpful.

Indeed, nothing we can do.

[Greyblades]

The method is described and the results summarized, there might be more in the magazine where it was originally published but I wouldn't know how to get that.

Then please, point out in the source you gave where the professor said what the method was, what the results were and how he came to his conclusions:

http://news.ku.edu/2014/03/03/law-pr...ime-statistics

You can dismiss this completely and believe that your government report is the absolute certain truth in numbers because it is so transparent.

Never said it was absolute truth, but much more convincing than a leaflet that doesnt even detail the contents of a survey, give all the results or how the results corroberate the conclusions.

Yes, one more reason to make people play the game even before college.

And what is that reason?

Indeed, nothing we can do.

And because it's base assumption remains unproven we cannot take it's conclusions as fact.

[Husar]

Then please, point out in the source you gave where the professor said what the method was, what the results were and how he came to his conclusions:

http://news.ku.edu/2014/03/03/law-pr...ime-statistics

Two separate trends have to be isolated and removed from the data
from police departments to effectively identify jurisdictions that likely
undercounted rape complaints. First, rape statistics have to be compared
with some other variable that would not be prone to police manipulation.
Otherwise, one might conclude that a very safe city is gaming its numbers
because of an unusually low rate of rape when, in reality, there is simply less
crime in that city. To that end, murder rates are used for each jurisdiction as
a baseline because such rates are not easily manipulated and are highly
correlated with rape rates. Second, individual city crime rates need to be
separated from national trends. During the study period, violent crime rates
were falling across the nation due to an array of factors (which were certain
to be unobserved variables). 158 Using each city’s variation from yearly
national crime rates was the means used to resolve that difficulty.

In total, at least 46 police departments responsible for populations
of at least 100,000 persons have substantial statistical irregularities in their
rape data indicating significant undercounting during the study period of
1995 to 2012.
[...]
More disconcertingly, the number of cities undercounting appears
to be on the rise. Figure 15 demonstrates that the number of undercounting
cities has risen by an astonishing 61% during the study period.

Difference Percentage Rate =
Percentage Murder Rate – Percentage Rape Rate

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...act_id=2404424

Never said it was absolute truth, but much more convincing than a leaflet that doesnt even detail the contents of a survey, give all the results or how the results corroberate the conclusions.

Well, now you know.

And what is that reason?

That more than 10% of students were already sexually assaulted before college.

And because it's base assumption remains unproven we cannot take it's conclusions as fact.

Exactly, just like the shady research methods of your government study make it completely useless.
It's too bad that we are debating the entire time and yet we have absolutely no reliable data, the rape rate could really be anywhere between 0% and 100%. I think I'm going to cry in a corner and leave this thread.

[Greyblades]

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...act_id=2404424

Better, next time lead with the dissertation and dont expect people to swallow an article on the weight of the man's degree, it would save us a lot of time.

Ah here we go:

The core element of the data police departments supply to the FBI is the total reported incidents of select criminal offenses (“Index Crimes”).52 Since the program’s inception, the FBI has included the crime of rape as one of the eight Index Crimes for which police departments could submit data.53

In addition to a count of reported crimes, the FBI annually issues the rate of crime nationally and for each jurisdiction using this basic formula: Crime Rate = (Reported Crimes/Population) x 100,000 Thus, the crime rate is defined as the number of reported criminal incidents for every 100,000 people.54 For the study period, and since the UCR’s inception, its narrow
definition of “rape” required: “carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will.”55 By employing the phrase “carnal knowledge,” that definition only includes a man vaginally
penetrating a woman with his penis, not oral or anal penetration.56

And the FBI acknowledged that: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...sked-questions

Thus I conceed that the numbers were wrong.

However the change in the FBI definition does not mean that there is an actual increase in rape, they were going on regardless of the diminished ability to record them. We do not know if rape is on the increase or declining.

Well, now you know.

Know what? One side getting disproven doesnt make the opposite automatically right, your leaflet's still witholding too much information to be useful.

That more than 10% of students were already sexually assaulted before college.

And? The purpose was to determine the degree that rape occurs in college, that they said they were assaulted before they started college that year is rather irrelevent because there is no way of differentiating whether those previous assaults were in a previous college year or if they happened before they started college.
The question did not specify if the assaults were on campus and now the results are contaminated by the students who said they were assaulted before college and reffering to assaults done any time between birth and starting higher education, which are irrelevant to the report's goal of determining teh rape rates among students.

Exactly, just like the shady research methods of your government study make it completely useless.
It's too bad that we are debating the entire time and yet we have absolutely no reliable data, the rape rate could really be anywhere between 0% and 100%. I think I'm going to cry in a corner and leave this thread.

And just as you were actually making progress. Your loss.

[Husar]

Better, next time lead with the dissertation and dont expect people to swallow an article on the weight of the man's degree, it would save us a lot of time.
[...]
And just as you were actually making progress. Your loss.

I don't care about losing or winning anything. You seem to assume that I have unlimited amounts of time to search for sources and read them thoroughly, but I do not. That means that I'm either an idiot or the wrong guy to discuss this any further if you want to make this a highly scientific, number-based discussion as I do not have the time or will to chase sources for you.