Would you know what to do?

If you or your friend was sexually assaulted, would you know where to go to report the crime or where to find other resources for help? Statistics say you do not.

A report on Iowa State’s sexual assault climate that was released last week by the American Association of Universities said just 28.1 percent of the more than 5,000 ISU students who answered the survey know where to make a report of sexual misconduct of any sort. Just 34 percent of students know where to find help.

Another concerning number, and perhaps the one that tells the most about reporting these crimes on college campuses, is that not quite 17 percent of the ISU students who responded know what happens once sexual misconduct is reported. While this may show a lack of education on the subject for ISU students — which the ISD Editorial Board discussed in an editorial last week — this could also indicate the reporting process is, quite frankly, too complicated and difficult to understand.

If the reporting process is simplified and similar powers are consolidated in one body rather than having redundant options for reporting sexual misconduct, perhaps more students would better understand how to report these instances.

Put simply, students have three options when reporting sexual misconduct. They can go through the criminal justice system, the university judicial system or both. While it may almost seem like a benefit having two channels to go through with a sexual misconduct case, the two bodies have very different goals and very different processes that students may not be aware of.

While one body has a goal of investigating the case and bringing a criminal to justice, the other wants to promote education and end discrimination. The study also showed that students have full confidence in Iowa State to act and keep them safe if they do report sexual misconduct to the university.

Title IX requires universities to inform a person if he or she is the subject of a sexual assault investigation that could easily lead to retaliation against the survivor.

In addition to this, university faculty are often not trained as investigators and do not have the power of arrests or subpoenas.

Finally, universities may feel pressure to cover up some of these cases or at least not include them in Clery Act Reports.

This room for error became very real for students here at Iowa State last year. It was announced that the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights decided to investigate the university for possibly mishandling a case of sexual assault.

The federal government’s investigation was launched after a father of an ISU student who was a sexual assault survivor wrote a letter to the Department of Education expressing concerns that the university was not doing enough in his daughter’s case. He said the person who committed the assault was placed on the same dorm floor as his daughter.

If universities have so much room for errors like this one and simply do not have the same power and resources to deal with sexual misconduct cases as law enforcement, why not consolidate these powers, allow universities to focus on what they do best and, in turn, simplify the reporting process for students.

If investigating an instance of sexual assault, prosecuting and punishing the perpetrator was left to the criminal justice system alone, universities would then be freed to focus on what they do best — taking care of students. 

If the reporting process was simplified, perhaps more students would better understand it, report sexual misconduct more frequently and not fall through the cracks. This would lead to a safer, more educated environment for all of our nation’s public colleges.