Statistics Facts
| 2006-2007 Facts |
|---|
| 2005-2006 Facts |
| 2004-2005 Facts |
| 2003-2004 Facts |
| 2002-2003 Facts |
| 2001-2002 Facts |
| 2000-2001 Facts |
| 1999-2000 Facts |
2006-2007 Facts (Partial)
As of November 2, 2006 there have been a total of 3 cases reported to the Office of Judicial Affairs for events that occurred during the 2006-2007 academic year. 2 involved the Honor Code; 1 involved the Fundamental Standard.
The 1 Fundamental Standard case has already gone to hearings, resulting in a finding that the student was responsible for the violation and thus was subject to sanction.
3 different University departments/offices/individuals have reported cases during 2006-07. The profile of students involved in the cases include 2 males and 1 females. All 3 have been undergraduates.
2005-2006 Facts (Partial)
As of November 2, 2006 there have been a total of 117 cases reported to the Office of Judicial Affairs for events that occurred during the 2005-2006 academic year. 81 involved the Honor Code; 35 involved the Fundamental Standard and 1 involved both Honor Code and Fundamental Standard concerns.
Of the 51 Honor Code cases that have gone to a hearing to date, 44 resulted in a finding that the student was responsible for the violation and thus was subject to sanction. 7 resulted in a finding that the student was not responsible for the violation. Of the 17 Fundamental Standard cases that have gone to hearings, 15 resulted in a finding that the student was responsible for the violation and thus was subject to sanction. 2 resulted in a finding that the student was not responsible for the violation
Of the 59 cases found responsible, there has been 2 appeals filed. Both appeals were denied.
40 different University departments/offices/individuals have reported cases during 2005-06. The profile of students involved in the cases include 80 males and 37 females. There have been 98 undergraduates and 19 graduates.
2004-2005 Facts
There were a total of 128 cases reported to the Office of Judicial Affairs for events that occurred during the 2004-2005 academic year. 100 involved the Honor Code; 28 involved the Fundamental Standard.
Of the 73 Honor Code cases that went to hearings, 68 resulted in a finding that the student was responsible for the violation and thus was subject to sanction. 5 resulted in a finding that the student was not responsible for the violation. Charges were dropped in 1 case based upon the discovery of exculpatory evidence. Of the 12 Fundamental Standard cases that went to hearings, 10 resulted in a finding that the student was responsible for the violation and thus was subject to sanction. 2 resulted in a finding that the student was not responsible for the violation.
Of the 78 cases found responsible, there were 5 appeals filed. In all five cases, the Final Appeals Panels denied the students' appeals and upheld the initial findings of responsibility and the sanctions imposed.
43 different University departments/offices/individuals reported cases during 2004-05. The profile of students involved in the cases included 95 males and 33 females. There were 93 undergraduates and 35 graduates.
2003-2004 Facts
There were a total of 124 cases reported to the Office of Judicial Affairs for events that occurred during the 2003-2004 academic year. 68 involved the Honor Code; 56 involved the Fundamental Standard.
Of the 49 Honor Code cases that went to hearings, 46 resulted in a finding that the student was responsible for the violation and thus was subject to sanction. 3 resulted in a finding that the student was not responsible for the violation. Charges were dropped in 1 case based upon the discovery of exculpatory evidence. Of the 35 Fundamental Standard cases that went to hearings, 31 resulted in a finding that the student was responsible for the violation and thus was subject to sanction. 4 resulted in a finding that the student was not responsible for the violation. Charges were dropped in 1 on statute of limitations grounds.
Of the 77 cases found responsible, there were 3 appeals filed. In 2 cases the Final Appeals Panels denied the students' appeals and upheld the initial findings of responsibility and the sanctions imposed. In 1 case the Final Appeals Panel reduced the sanctions.
39 different University departments/offices/individuals reported cases during 2003-04. The profile of students involved in the cases included 89 males and 35 females. There were 96 undergraduates and 28 graduates.
2002-2003 Facts
There was a total of 131 cases that were reported to the Office of Judicial Affairs for events that occurred during the 2002-2003 academic year. 96 involved the Honor Code; 35 involved the Fundamental Standard.
Of the 65 Honor Code cases that went to hearings, 61 resulted in a finding that the student was responsible for the violation and thus was subject to sanction. 4 resulted in a finding that the student was not responsible for the violation. Of the 19 Fundamental Standard cases that went to hearings, 19 resulted in a finding that the student was responsible and thus was subject to sanction. In 9 of those cases, alcohol policy violations were found; in 4, students were also found responsible for hazing policy violations.
There was 1 appeal filed, which was later withdrawn.
29 different University departments/offices/groups were involved in the year's cases. The profile of students involved in the cases included 82 males and 49 females. There were 102 undergraduates and 29 graduates.
2001-2002 Facts
There was a total of 105 cases that were reported to the Office of Judicial Affairs for events that occurred during the 2001-2002 academic year. 84 involved the Honor Code; 21 involved the Fundamental Standard.
Of the 67 Honor Code cases that went to hearings, 64 resulted in a finding that the student was responsible for the violation and thus was subject to sanction. 3 resulted in a finding that the student was not responsible for the violation. Of the 13 Fundamental Standard cases that went to hearings, all 13 resulted in a finding that the student was responsible for the violation and thus was subject to sanction.
There were 4 appeals. In 3 the seated Final Appeals Panels denied the students' appeals and upheld the initial findings of responsibility and sanctions. The remaining appeal was remanded for a new Judicial Panel to rehear the case (in which rehearing the new panel found the student responsible and imposed (increased) sanctions).
30 different University departments/offices/groups were involved in the year's cases. The profile of students involved in the cases included 79 males and 26 females. There were 75 undergraduates and 30 graduates.
2000-2001 Facts
There was a total of 119 cases that were reported to the Office of Judicial Affairs for events that occurred during the 2000-2001 academic year. 104 involved the Honor Code; 15 involved the Fundamental Standard.
Of the 61 Honor Code cases that went to hearings, 59 resulted in a finding that the student was responsible for the violation and thus was subject to sanction. 2 resulted in a finding that the student was not responsible for the violation. Of the 9 Fundamental Standard cases that went to hearings, 7 resulted in a finding that the student was responsible for the violation and thus was subject to sanction. 2 resulted in a finding that the student was not responsible for the violation.
There were 4 appeals. In 3 the seated Final Appeals Panels denied the students' appeals and upheld the initial findings of responsibility and sanctions. In the remaining appeal, sanctions were reduced.
27 different University departments/offices/groups were involved in the year's cases. The profile of students involved in the cases included 88 males and 31 females. There were 84 undergraduates and 34 graduates and 1 summer program high school student.
1999-2000 Facts
There was a total of 66 cases reported to the Office of Judicial Affairs for events that occurred during the 1999-2000 academic year. 52 involved the Honor Code; 14 involved the Fundamental Standard.
Of the 40 Honor Code cases that went to hearings, 37 resulted in a finding that the student was responsible for the violation and thus was subject to sanction. 3 resulted in a finding that the student was not responsible for the violation. Of the 4 Fundamental Standard cases that went to hearings, 3 resulted in a finding that the student was responsible for the violation and thus was subject to sanction. One resulted in a finding that the student was not responsible for the violation.
There were 3 appeals. In 2 the seated Final Appeals Panels denied the students' appeals and upheld the initial findings of responsibility and sanctions. The remaining appeal was returned to the original Judicial Panel (although the student involved then voluntarily determined not to continue the process any longer) .
24 different University departments/offices/groups were involved in the year's cases. The profile of students involved in the cases included 45 males and 21 females. There were 45 undergraduates and 21 graduates.