We Don’t Need No Education
Who needs fancy book learnin' if you already have all the answers?
The OU Daily reports: OU puts graduate instructor on leave after student claims discrimination on Bible-based essay grade.
OU placed a graduate student instructor on leave after a student publicly contested a grade and filed an illegal discrimination claim after she received a failing grade on an essay that cited the Bible.
[…]
“The University of Oklahoma takes seriously concerns involving First Amendment rights, certainly including religious freedoms. Upon receiving notice from the student on the grading of an assignment, the University immediately began a full review of the situation and has acted swiftly to address the matter,” the statement read.
Like the case at Texas A&M that I wrote about earlier this year, the issue in controversy is linked to gender, although in this situation, it is in a psychology course.
According to the statement, university leaders contacted Samantha Fulnecky, a psychology junior, the day she submitted her complaint, and a formal grade appeals process was conducted. Steps were taken to ensure there was no academic harm to the student, the statement reads.
OU also placed a graduate student instructor on administrative leave and placed a different full-time professor to teach the class for the remainder of the semester after the student reported filing a claim of illegal discrimination based on religious beliefs.
“OU has a clear process for reviewing such claims and it has been activated, …” the statement reads. “OU remains firmly committed to fairness, respect and protecting every student’s right to express sincerely held religious beliefs.”
Let me state, as a former university administrator, that I find it highly unlikely that the standard operating procedure in such a case is to suspend the instructor and assign a different faculty member to finish out the term.
And allow me to add: I agree that a student should not be discriminated against based on their religious convictions. However, upon reading the student’s work, I can assure you that that is not what is going on here. The essay and the grading criteria have been provided by The Oklahoman (OU student says essay grade was a violation of her rights. Read the essay).
In simple terms, the student received a poor grade not because of her beliefs, but because she didn’t answer the question that was asked and did not fulfill any of the stated criteria. The assignment was to react to a specific article. Apart from making a few references to “the article,” there is almost nothing about the article’s content (the closest specific appears to be the student disagreeing with the article by endorsing children teasing other children over gender issues, which the article criticized). There is therefore no clear link back to the article (worth 10 points), nor is there a specific reaction to the content of the article (worth 10 points). The piece is just a rumination, in super vague terms I would note, about the student’s views, and so I can see why the instructor took off the 5 points for clarity. I could make a case to give the essay maybe a 3 to 5 instead of 0 (there is some tenuous connection to the general topic of the article, with one very weak reference and her point is clear, to a point), but the 0 is perfectly defensible. This is, after all, a reaction paper with very little direct reaction taking place.
It is worth noting that a second instructor reviewed the grade and concurred with the initial assessment.
Even the NY Post described the assignment as follows (emphasis mine).
In her essay, which was supposed to cover “how people are perceived based on societal expectations of gender,” University of Oklahoma student Samantha Fulnecky presented a biblically fueled tirade against the notion that there are multiple genders.
[…]
In the essay, Fulnecky repeats ad nauseam that she doesn’t take issue with gender stereotypes because “that is how God made us.” However, she neglected to cite the article she was responding to, save for a vague reference to “teasing as a way to enforce gender norms.”
Nonetheless, the governor is commenting publicly and calling on the Board of Regents to get involved. None of this is appropriate. Neither the governor nor the regents have any capacity or standing to make narrow academic judgements, even if they are at the top of the university’s org chart (back to the OU Daily write-up).
Gov. Kevin Stitt wrote in a post on social platform X Sunday that the situation was “deeply concerning” and called on the OU Board of Regents to review the results of the investigation.
I was involved in a similar case in my previous life. A student in history based an entire graduate-level response on the notion that a certain key development in American history was because of divine intervention rather than actually answering the question the way a historian ought. One is more than free to believe that to be the case, but it is not an acceptable way to provide an academic response in an academic setting.
No one is saying, by the way, that the student can’t believe what she wants nor that she cannot say what she wants, i.e., her First Amendment rights are not being violated here. Having the right to freely speak and to believe whatever you want does not mean that citing your religious beliefs results in an automatic gateway to an “A” on an assignment. You can state all day long that the Earth is only thousands of years old, based on your belief that the Bible provides that answer, but that will not get you a passing score on a geology exam. You may wish to claim, based on a certain past interpretation of the text, that the Sun orbits the Earth, but that’s an F for you.
A Flat Earther, to pivot to another belief system, cannot assert First Amendment rights in objection to their failing astronomy grade.
A few elements that are really important.
- This was an attack on a graduate student–someone who is quite vulnerable. Not only are we talking about the lack of tenure, but we are talking about someone who does not yet have their degree, and serious disruptions to their progression could be career-destroying. Further, teaching at this stage is CV building (i.e., important fodder for job-seeking).
- The graduate student is trans, which further suggests this was a deliberate choice to create a controversy by the student and others.
- The student’s mother is an attorney connected to GOP politics (including defending J6 defendants).
- Turning Point USA is in the middle of all of this.
It is worth remembering that the incident at A&M involved a non-tenured faculty member by a student who had broader connections to GOP politics.
Why does this matter apart from the specific details of the case as it pertains to the student’s grade and the instructor’s future? This is about broad, national politics and attacks on academic freedom, knowledge, and even learning itself. University officials are reacting this way to an utterly obscure single assignment because of a combination of anti-trams prejudice as well as a general anti-intellectual attitude that is gripping parts of the populace and genuine fear of retribution from the federal government. This is incredibly disturbing.
I cannot stress how penny-ante this situation is, taken in proper context. The University if Oklahoma has an undergraduate population of over 23,000 students. A full-time load is 4 courses per semester, and a normal load is 5, with a handful of students perhaps in part-time status and some taking overloads. A heavily conservative estimate would say that there are well over 100,000 total course enrollments this semester, meaning hundreds of thousands of individual assignments being graded. There are likely thousands of students who are certain that their professors and graduate assistants are mean, unfair, if not, utterly biased. If the administration, governor, regents, etc., took the individual time to deal with each of those students the way they are dealing with the one I am writing about here, the university would literally be paralyzed.
The fact that so many in the American academy have so easily reacted to fear is stunningly depressing.
This is all, pure and simple, an authoritarian ethos at work. It is stating that knowledge and learning are subject not to the internal development of the academy, broadly defined, but instead must conform to the accepted orthodoxy of the regime or else punishment may ensue.
I would note the idea of TPUSA installing chapter at high schools and colleges/universities so that they can keep an eye on faculty and provide “watchlists” sounds a lot like having political officers embedded to make sure everyone conforms with regime orthodoxy (certainly as long as the regime is willing to withhold millions of dollars if it doesn’t like your university).
If people think that the current scientific consensus on whatever matter at hand is wrong, they have the same opportunity to change it that we all have. Read, study, research, even degress, argue with facts, try to prove your position, while all the while being willing to have your own mind changed (such is the core of scientific inquiry). It is long, hard, and often fruitless work.
Above all else, think that you might be wrong.
Simply asserting is true because of personal beliefs, simply doesn’t cut it, pure and simple even if large political forces will temporarily back your claims via power instead of knowledge.
Let me conclude with practical advice for students.
- Read the assignment thoroughly and answer the question that is asked! It is amazing how often students will answer some other question that they have conceived in their own minds.
- Make sure to conform to any provided rubric or guideline.
- Don’t simply assert; make an evidence-based argument.
- If you attempt to make a solid argument, you will likely get a good score, even if the conclusion is controversial.
While it is true that there are instructors out there who want students to conform to a very specific point of view, the reality is that how a student answers is often as important, if not more so, than what answer provided is. Granted, that is also often discipline-specific. But even in the experimental/lab sciences (or even math) a partial answer, well-constructed, even if ultimately wrong, is likely to net partial credit.
The best way to a zero score is to assert an argument-free opinion.
One concluding thought: if a given student is certain that they already have all the answers, what are they doing wasting their time in schools? I mean, why waste all that time and money? The notion of pursuing an education only to have all your pre-existing views, positions, and knowledge confirmed is a remarkable one to hold. What’s the point?
Suggests? No, that was its sole purpose.
Also, and I know this wasn’t your intent, but this is far from penny-ante. This is an attempt to destroy a life. This is an attempt to create another Lia Smith situation.
My last suicide attempt on April 18, 2025, came two days after the Supreme Court of England and Wales announced that I’m not allowed to use public bathrooms. The day after my suicide attempt I was told that I had to use the men’s room at a club. The toilets were overflowing and I can’t use a urinal.
The reality of the situation has absolutely nothing to do with academic standards. It has everything to do with making it impossible for trans people to exist in public. No healthcare, no jobs, no toilets, everything to make it impossible for us to live. And if some bigoted whackjob gets to make some coin, well, even better.
One of the things we need as trans people is for respectable men like you to be absolutely 100% clear in mind and voice what is happening. Then to use your mind and voice to unequivocally bash back.
In the case of Ms. Fulnecky, the point is to proselytize. For Fulnecky, Stitt, the TPUSA, and their technocratic ilk, it has never been about their freedom to believe what they believe. They have that freedom now. They want dominion over the heathen.
This is insane.
I googled this person’s name. The student complained:
From an social media account called Signed, Oklahoma,
“If this was regarding any other religion, I’m sure President Harroz would apologize personally.”
From Fox News ig,
TA only suspended after dispute went viral.
So it wasn’t enough that she got a failing grade removed even though she did not fulfill the requirements of the assignment. It did not happen immediately. She wanted to smite the instructor.
Don’t be so sure. It’s possible there is a geology student somewhere with a politically connected crackpot lawyer ready to do the same thing.
Oh, good, “conservatives” have spawned another professional victim.
She didn’t do the assignment, she got the grade she deserved. And anyone defending this nonsense is welcome to hire her, because I guarantee she’s not great at following instructions, so good luck!
If that student was able to demonstrate the divine intervention, that I think they should have gotten an excellent grade, and I have a reasonable confidence that if a student in one of your grad classes proved not only the existence of God, but also God taking sides in the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire (or whatever) you would have given them such a grade.
But this students 650 word scrawl was not this groundbreaking bit of scholarship.
The nazis didn’t start the Holocaust by sending Jews to death camps. They did things like this first.
@Jen:
Is anyone keeping count? After all their whining about “cancel culture”, seems to me I hear of a lot more people losing jobs and even being jailed because of sanctions BY conservatives than otherwise.
What @Scott F.: said, “it has never been about their freedom to believe what they believe. They have that freedom now. They want dominion over the heathen.” Remember, the Pilgrims didn’t come here so much to escape religious persecution as to be the persecuters.
@Beth: Well, I’ve got your back. The situation seems terrible. For you, and for that grad student instructor. I would lay good odds that it was a calculated assault.
However, I’m not so sure about my “respectability”. I am from Blaine, after all. It had the worst reputation of any town in my county. Maybe it still does. Saying you are from Blaine can still raise eyebrows. Steven has it all over me as far as respectability goes, having been a dean and all.
Honestly, that’s probably why I identify with people who are a bit, how might I say this, off-center.
Trans people exist. They have alway existed. They will always exist – as long as humans do. Who knows, maybe longer? They are a blessing to us.
The only questions before us are how much misery are we going to subject them to, and how much are we going to accept the blessing that knowing a trans person brings?
@Jay L. Gischer:
I do, as well.
I never get the impression you identify at all with me.
😉
@Kurtz: not sure it was calculated, but it was definitely deliberate.
May just be angry right winger attends class to be offended, writes essay to offend, complains angrily that she faced consequences, calls for head… no plan, just moment by moment anger.
@Gustopher:
To be fair, I don’t know. I agreed with my understanding of Jay’s wording. I cannot speak for him, but “laying good odds” implies less than certainty. That interpretation also fits with my interpretation of how Jay thinks about things.
It seems like a career move to me more than anything. The Riley Gaines Guide to Making Something Out of Nothing.
If I’m not mistaken, it was an upper-level class about the psychology of gender. That is unlikely to be required for every psych student. At most, it may be required for a specific concentration. Your seem to acknowledge that in your reply. For me, it stretches credulity to think that it was anything but calculated.
Most of all, if a student does not want to learn about the subject of an elective, a responsible student chooses a different course if only out of self-interest. Unless there is an ulterior motive separate from education.
Yet another example of personal responsibility, not as an advertised ethical foundation, but as a cudgel to be deployed against out groups.
Moreover, if any student wonders about whether their approach to an assignment would satisfy the requirements detailed in the grading rubric, the proper thing to do is to ask the instructor. More to the point, it is the student’s responsibility to do just that.
As far as why I think this is a career move more than anything else. I recall the line from the newsroom storyline of The Wire:
As a columnist and a reporter stare out the window at smoke billowing across town, one of them says to the editor who is entering the room, “Something’s on fire.”
At the end of the scene, the editor tells the reporter, “he’s a columnist, he is payed to sit on his ass. What’s your excuse?”
The thing about opinion TV, unlike being a columnist, it doesn’t require writing skills unless one is forced to work for their position. Doing it this way skips the grinding rat race of learning how to be a journalist, learning how to write, or working your way up via local television jobs. Not to mention trying to make a career in the world of psychology. Both those paths are difficult and highly competitive.
So much easier to attain celebrity through entitled grievance.
I say it’s 50/50 whether we eventually see this person introduced as a psychologist, even if it’s in an interview with a YouTube creator.
The proposition that students have a first amendment right to say whatever they like in university assessment tasks is so preposterous it defies belief that people in important public offices could even consider it. It demonstrates not only a profound misunderstanding of the meaning of the first amendment, but utter cluelessness about the nature of higher education and the purpose of assessment.
I don’t know why so many American right-wingers seem unable to comprehend that courses of study have prescribed learning outcomes, and the purpose of assessment is to evaluate the extent to which students have achieved those learning outcomes. To read a lot of MAGAt opinions, you’d think universities are a kind of institutionalised discussion forum where students get to express their opinions about various topics as if they were training to be talking heads on cable TV.
@Ken_L:
Because in many subjects, they have to learn ideas and theories they don’t like. The very purpose of a learning outcome is taken as indoctrination.
Thinking back to my school days, there was plenty of what I was taught that I took issue with. Plato’s metaphysics come to mind, Marx’s views on economics, Aristotle’s notions on physics, to name a few. It took me a while to get it that the teachers were not advocating for any particular idea, even if they favored some over others*, and the point was to learn what such thinkers thought and why, and to think about their ideas.
Science courses were different, as there’s no difference of opinion on the mass of the proton, Newton’s laws of motion, or whether compounds have physical and chemical properties that differ from their constituent atoms (even sometimes if a compound is made up of two of the same atom).
I’ve no idea what is taught in a class on the psychology of gender, or about gender roles. most classes have a historical overview of their subject. In science classes, and psychology qualifies, there should be exposition and explanation of research and evidence, as well as of the prevailing consensus and how it was arrived at.
Of course, you all know this and understand it’s not indoctrination, but to the religious fundamentalist brain, any contradiction of their beliefs is an attack meant to destroy faith or something.
*One philosophy teacher was obsessed with the notion that we cannot ever really know reality, and that science was merely one explanation in a vain attempt to impose order on chaos. I hated his class.
@Ken_L:
To add on to a part of @Kathy’s explanation, I think it’s relevant that some evangelicals adhere to interpretations of Biblical prophecies that true Christians will be persecuted.
I had a professor once that expressed his opinion that GWB believed he was carrying out Biblical prophecy. I don’t think I saw W. the same way then. Even less so now. But I can see why the professor would hold that view. And I do think it does describe the thought process of Christian Nationalists.
I think the thing you are addressing is whether it was premeditated. I guess I lean toward it not being premeditated – not being the result of a few people getting together and signing up for a particular class in order to try to get a trans person in trouble/fired. I can’t, however, rule that out.
Nah, it probably crept up on people and just kept escalating, with nobody feeling like de-escalating. Lucky for me that when I was a prof, it was in a mathy kind of thing. Controversial political topics don’t usually come up.
@Jay L. Gischer:
One of the reasons I added the point about choosing a particular elective is because it seems absurd that somebody would commit to spending the hours involved in a course just to be offended.
But maybe it is as simple as what Gustopher said: choices snowballing.
@Beth: I want to say that I take seriously what you have to say, and I truly hope that things improve for you.
@Kurtz:
Sadly, you’re not wrong.
I will say that I have been heartened to see a lot of online commenters criticizing the student rather than the instructor.
@Kurtz:
Here’s my rough theory: she clearly comes from a home with a particular point of view that was the preexisting condition. She started doing poorly in the class, and as students who do poorly often do, she rationalized her poor performance. TPUSA then got involved, and that created the political and media juice necessary to escalate the situation, and then the OU administration, cognizant of the general political environment, overreacted.
This a a toxic stew of anti-trans and anti-high ed sentiment with the whole Charlie Kirk situation as an accelerant.
BTW: I saw a clip of the student being interviewed–she speaks kind of how she writes. I find it unlikely that she is some kind of mastermind in a deliberate plot to bring things to this point, shall we say.
Charlie Kirk would (probably) be proud.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Thanks for the info.
Two things may have affected my thinking:
1.) I recently watched parts of a few YT videos about industry plants in music—two were of the normal YT variety, the last was from a creator who I respect intellectually;
2.) after I read this piece, I did some Googling. As I clicked through to an article, I briefly saw a link entitled:
“American Hero” Samantha Fulnecky Makes Her Fox News Debut.
When I tried to find it again, I could not. I did not try very hard. My mind may have combined a few different things I saw in passing. No idea.
Either way, the explanations Gus, you, and Jay went with seem more reasonable. Especially a day later.
EDIT: Though, it’s still unclear to me why she would take that class. Of course, maybe she got stuck with it via registering late or after dropping another class.
@Steven L. Taylor: She doesn’t have to be a “mastermind” for this to work as she’s got the conservative bullshit crew doing the hard work for her.
I’ve run into these types in college. They complain on ratemyprofesors about how the mean evil liberal professor was discriminating against them because they are pro-American and conservative.. IN reality in class they were an idiot that didn’t seem to be able to understand the concepts of the class. One woman in particular seemed determined to go out of her way to argue with the teacher whenever possible. Older white proto-MAGA woman that tried to buddy up with me because I’m white and conservative looking ugh..
The idiot in the situation covered in OP had connections to make the complaint into something bigger.
Meanwhile I had a history professor that legit claimed that FDR caused the great depression and extended it with his evil new deal… I meant to ask that professor what he believed motivated FDR to intentionally destroy the country but by the time I passed the class I didn’t GAF about it and just wanted away from that conservative brain rot…. Sad part is dude was very very knowledgeable about southwestern US history.
The thing that irks me the most about these fake Christians is the abject hypocrisy — they make the rest of us look bad bc they’re inverting / perverting the faith.
Sure, saved by grace yadda yadda.. but Philippians 2:12 places a demand on every Christian to demonstrate each and every day how you as a person are living as a result of that grace. Call it a commandment if you’d like – a requirement to be humble. Grace was never intended to be a one-and-done thing.
This person is using religion as a bad-faith crutch to avoid getting the grade they deserve in a subject they obviously don’t want to work that hard to master.
And we haven’t even begun to discuss how Republicans following Trump couldn’t be further from meeting the standard of that verse.