Campus Crime Data

Campus Crime Data

Practical Application Scenario
As a result of recent campus safety concerns at Capella University, you have been engaged by campus
security team leaders to gather and analyze data about on-campus crime rates in schools in the state of
Minnesota. Crime data from 181 Minnesota campuses has been compiled in the Campus Crime Data file.
Write a management report for campus security team leaders analyzing and evaluating campus crime
data for Minnesota. Include your findings and recommendations for your clients. In your report, be sure to
examine the following:

3. What crimes were most commonly committed on Minnesota campuses between 2009 and 2011?
   Based on the data, would you say the crime rates decreased or increased from 2009 to 2011?
4. The campus security leaders believe that the total crime rate in public institutions is more than that in
   private institutions. They have asked you to test that hypothesis. Describe your results.
5. Your clients would also like you to develop a 95 percent confidence interval for the difference in total
   campus crime rates between public and private institutions in Minnesota. Report your results.
6. What, if any, ethical issues should concern you in conducting your research?
   Complete your report in a Word document, pasting in whatever relevant tables and graphics you need to
   support your findings. Place your tables and graphics within the text and be sure to clearly title them. Your
   tables and graphics must be legible and suitable for inclusion in a management report.

CAMPUS CRIME DATA  2

Campus Crime Data

Different kinds of crimes happen in many Minnesota campuses as per Campus crime data
compiled for 181 Minnesota campuses. However, the most highly committed crimes in
Minnesota campus between 2009 and 2011 were the burglary, forcible sex and vehicle theft. The
number of crimes relating to burglary in 2009 was 368; forcible sex was 79 compared to vehicle
theft which was 50 cases. The cases of burglary in 2010 were 291, forcible sex was 66, and
vehicle theft was 50 cases. In 2011 burglary was 253; forcible sex was 16 while vehicle theft
remained at 50.
From this statistics, it is evident that the level of crimes has reduced to considerable
levels. For instance, the crimes relating to burglary committed in Minnesota campus in 2009
were 368 compared to those that were committed in 210 averaging to 269 and those in
committed in 2011 that were at 253. The cases of crimes relating to forcible sex and motor
vehicle theft as well reduced.
The hypothesis states that the crime rates in public institutions are higher compared to
private institutions. This hypothesis requires testing to ascertain whether indeed it is true or false.
Testing the hypothesis using the total number of people involved in the crimes in university
indicates that 276284 both men and women involved in crimes in private institutions compared
to 202695 in public institutions. Therefore, this null hypothesis is rejected. One reason that

CAMPUS CRIME DATA  3
explains these is that private institutions have not put in place strong security systems compared
to private institutions (Minnesota State University, 2012).
In terms of confidence intervals regarding crime rates between public and private
institutions, 95% is the true value of the parameter confident, hence is in the confident interval.
Therefore, when this hypothesis is tested again using the same sample, it is apparent that the
level of crimes in public institutions will be fewer compared to those in private institutions.
Ethics lay a key role in the success of the study especially in collection and analysis of
descriptive statistical data. In this study, the ethical issues of concerns include informed consent,
confidentiality, and privacy (Singer, 2011). It is important to get consent from the parties
involved during data collections. Permission will be sort from various university administrations
before commencement of the study. Participants should not be coerced to take part in the study
and are at liberty to withdraw their participation at will and at any time. It is also important to
uphold to privacy. No information must be disclosed to third parties without the consent from the
respondents. Therefore, confidentiality must not be compromised and all information must be
secured and not manipulated for selfish gains or interest. Appropriate analysis techniques should
be adopted to analyze the information.
In line with crime rates in Minnesota learning institutions, the following are the
recommendations: the leading rimes in institutions are forcible sex offense, burglary and motor
vehicle thefts. For instance, the crimes relating to burglary in 2009 was 368; forcible sex was 79
compared to vehicle theft which was 50 cases. These three crimes can be addressed by
intensifying security through installation of security cameras in all buildings in institutions

CAMPUS CRIME DATA  4
(Swedberg, 2010). This will help track the perpetrators. It will also help deter such kinds of
crimes.
The security apparatus in the learning institutions, should as well work closely with the
people to fight burglary and forcible sex offense and motor vehicle theft. Any person that feels
their security is threatened should report to the security department at the university. People
should also be their brothers’ keepers. Security should be assured to all those that provide
information and their identity should never be disclosed. This will motivate them to participate in
the fight against such crimes. Stringent laws should be passed to act as deterrence to involvement
of such crimes at the university.

CAMPUS CRIME DATA  5

References

Minnesota State University. (2012). Public safety.

Singer, E. (2011). Public Reactions to Some Ethical Issues of Social Research: Attitudes and
Behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(1), 501-50

Swedberg, J. (2010). Security Strategies. Credit Union Management, 33(3), 30-34.