OU Student given a zero for citing the bible in essay

[RileyG]

Why should they be treated differently than any other students?

They shouldn’t.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Riley,


I'm glad you understand that Ms. Fulnecky earned her zero. If you read the notes from the TA I posted above (or in The Oklahoman article), it is clear that "bias" had nothing to do with this score. Failure to do the work is failure.

It is not a business. A university is not a big box retail store. It is an institution of education and scholarship.

 

[RileyG]

Riley,


I'm glad you understand that Ms. Fulnecky earned her zero. If you read the notes from the TA I posted above (or in The Oklahoman article), it is clear that "bias" had nothing to do with this score. Failure to do the work is failure.

It is not a business. A university is not a big box retail store. It is an institution of education and scholarship.

Yes. That’s fair. I don’t disagree with the zero at all. She deserved it because she didn’t do the assignment. Simple really.

Universities still don’t want “bad press” because they’re so concerned about their “reputation.”

I have nothing else to add.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Yes. That’s fair. I don’t disagree with the zero at all. She deserved it because she didn’t do the assignment. Simple really.

Universities still don’t want “bad press” because they’re so concerned about their “reputation.”

I have nothing else to add.

It's amazing that there is any "furor" about this. Just another student not doing an assignment.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

At will employment isn't as sweeping as people seem to think it is
There's still nothing preventing a wrongful termination lawsuit if the terminated employee can make a valid claim of retaliation

Retaliation for what? Generally speaking, if you're fired, it's retaliation for something, but the only forms of retaliation that are illegal are for reporting issues to regulators (i.e. OSHA, wage complaints, Title IX, etc). Being fired as retaliation for doing your job "wrong" (regardless of whether or not you're actually doing it wrong) is not illegal. The only way to successfully fight a firing like this would be if you could show that other people in the same position did similar things and weren't fired for them. But that would be difficult to do even if you did have some examples, because there would still likely be enough differences that the university could make a case.

Also, many of those right to work and at will provisions are shaved off when an organization is receiving federal funds and grants or is a public educational institution.

Federal employment laws are less restrictive than state laws - that's how laws in this country work. Federal laws set the baseline, and states are permitted to pass additional laws on top of the federal laws, so long as they don't conflict with or violate federal laws. I've been a TA at a public university (though not in Oklahoma), and I was treated as a normal hourly employee - I could have been fired for any (or no) reason, so long as it did not violate the law. There would have been some pushback from my graduate advisor if they'd done that without a good reason, but there were no legal restrictions preventing the administration from doing so.

If this was really a pure case of a biased panel and OK laws allowed for college instructors to get axed for any reason or no reason at all, they wouldn't have spent two months reviewing and do what they did. The would have just said buh bye and shown the TA the door

Not seeing anything about "two months". The student complained at the end of November, and the TA was placed on leave immediately. He was fired three weeks later. Seems like a normal length of time for an academic review process - the university would need to follow its internal policies for this sort of action in order to satisfy Legal.

The TA was a part of a protected federal class were they not? Do you think a major university of that size would be taking that risk if they didn't think they had the goods to back it up should it end up in the court system?

Everyone is part of a protected federal class. Everyone has a race and a gender, for example. It only becomes relevant, though, if the reason you were fired was related to your membership in a protected class.

Yes, because they have a battery of attorneys who told them that was the most prudent option given the circumstances

The most prudent option, or simply "fully legal, little to no chance of a lawsuit succeeding"? How would you know either way? If Admin goes to Legal and asks, "Can we fire this TA?," Legal isn't going to give them the best options for the situation, they're just going to say yes or no.

 

[Pommer]

It's amazing that there is any "furor" about this. Just another student not doing an assignment.

To be fair, the story was couched as “Christian victimized by Big Education!”, that, right there is an invitation to form an opinion. Resisting it is delicious.

 

[BCP1928]

In the modern academia world where credentialism is king, there is no feasible way for a student to "challenge" a study without a flat out rejection.

The assignment was a reaction to an abstract that was published by 2 people who have a grand total of 26 published works between them and an unimpressive number of citations (which, in the academic community, means they're "shlubs" for lack of a better term, the anti-vaxxers who went on Rogan have a more impressive professional record than the people who authored the piece they were tasked with reviewing)

This was absolutely a "concede the premise" assignment.

The only premise that you would have to concede is that gender atypicality actually exists. Is that too much for you? Not all gender atypicality can be traced to LGBT and the distinction was not made in the study nor it's causes much discussed so you wouldn't be committing to the existence of LGBT.

Example:

If there was some TA you had in an economics class, who made it pretty clear they were on the conservative side economically speaking...

And they gave you the assignment of
Read this abstract from these two pro trickle down people who've been cited fewer than a dozen times, and
- talk about why you think their work is important
- talk about how their work applies to your own life
- link objective findings that have proven their premise to be impactful
- talk about how that ties in with what I talked about Tuesday
- talk about how their research can be taken to the next developmental stage

What would your reaction be to that?

Clearly there's a hard stop at #1 on the list, because if someone tasked me with explaining why economists who favor trickle down is important, my response would be "it's not, and this is a sham"

Mine would be, "Trickle down theory is important because, true or not, it is still influential in political circles."

Plus, for any of us (and I believe this includes both you and I) that have been in the college environment, we all know that TAs can have some "bit of a power trip" tendencies lol. Basically, a person who's been in college for 5 years, wanting to lord over "those simpleton undergrads who've only been here for 3 years"

No, I never had that experience. I wasn't that childish about intellectual authority when I was in college, the worst complaint about TAs I can think of is that some of them were not very good teachers.

 

[Hans Blaster]

To be fair, the story was couched as “Christian victimized by Big Education!”, that, right there is an invitation to form an opinion. Resisting it is delicious.

It's too bad there aren't any right-wing Christian universities in Oklahoma...

 

[BCP1928]

What about em-dashes?

With regard to this whole thing though I would give some criticism to the TA that graded it. I don't think it was appropriate for them to have written "graded by an LGBTQ+ person" or whatever it actually said with trans flag colors for highlighting. Even if they were highly offended by what she said, and they should have been, we all should have been IMO, I think "rubbing it in" like that just wasn't appropriate.

I agree. It wasn't just a bad paper given an "F." If I had ever received an unhinged rant like that from an undergraduate in response to one of my routine assignments I would begin to be concerned for that student and would want to take the time to explain to her why her paper did not meet the requirements of the study and why the assignment was not a threat to her beliefs. In fact, in today's political climate I might have made that last point in writing in the syllabus,

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Mine would be, "Trickle down theory is important because, true or not, it is still influential in political circles."

Based on the paper guidelines that I linked the google doc for, that wouldn't have sufficed either.

It was an 8-point list of facets that had to be discussed (a few of which tilted toward a particular narrative)

No, I never had that experience. I wasn't that childish about intellectual authority when I was in college, the worst complaint about TAs I can think of is that some of them were not very good teachers.

Fair to assume you were in college just a "few" years before I was?

I think it's safe to assume campus climates may have changed just a tad.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

The most prudent option, or simply "fully legal, little to no chance of a lawsuit succeeding"? How would you know either way? If Admin goes to Legal and asks, "Can we fire this TA?," Legal isn't going to give them the best options for the situation, they're just going to say yes or no.

In its statement announcing Curth's firing, the university said the school's provost, described as the "highest-ranking academic officer," personally reviewed the incident before the decision to fire Curth was made.

He was fired three weeks later

According to what I've read, Mel Curth's pronouns are "she/they"

 

[RocksInMyHead]

In its statement announcing Curth's firing, the university said the school's provost, described as the "highest-ranking academic officer," personally reviewed the incident before the decision to fire Curth was made.

And?

According to what I've read, Mel Curth's pronouns are "she/they"

Okay, I'll be sure to use the proper pronouns in the future.

 

[BCP1928]

Based on the paper guidelines that I linked the google doc for, that wouldn't have sufficed either.

I though you were talking about just the first one.

It was an 8-point list of facets that had to be discussed (a few of which tilted toward a particular narrative)

How so? What narrative?

Fair to assume you were in college just a "few" years before I was?

I think it's safe to assume campus climates may have changed just a tad.

Maybe so. Thinking of it, the last time I taught on campus was about fifteen years ago, though I've taken classes since. How do you know what the campus climate is?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

How so? What narrative?

The basis of the abstract they were tasked with reviewing was framing an oppressed vs. oppressor type scenario based on "gender typicality" was it not?:

...examines whether being high in gender typicality is associated with popularity, whether being low in gender typicality is associated with rejection/teasing, and whether teasing due to low gender typicality mediates the association with negative mental health. Middle school children (34 boys and 50 girls) described hypothetical popular and rejected/teased peers, and completed self-report measures about their own gender typicality, experiences with gender-based teasing, depressive symptoms, anxiety, self-esteem, and body image.

It's not hard to read between the lines.

Maybe so. Thinking of it, the last time I taught on campus was about fifteen years ago, though I've taken classes since. How do you know what the campus climate is?

I went to college, and have younger family members who currently are in college.

I was fortunate enough to graduate about 20 years ago, when the adults were still in charge.

...but I still saw a little of the "chip on the shoulder" when it came to the humanities and soft sciences instructors in their treatment of people who were taking the classes because it was a mandatory requirement on the path to something else...especially if that "something else" is "higher up on the social totem pole", and not their primary area of study.
(which, from what I've read, this student in question is pre-med)

 

[ThatRobGuy]

And?

and... is the highest ranking academic officer for the institution going to make decisions willy-nilly?

Okay, I'll be sure to use the proper pronouns in the future.

I don't care about the pronoun rules.

I just felt it was worth bringing up to give a contextual backdrop given the nature of the assignment, the critical grade, and the way the TA personally identifies.

If a student wrote a paper critical of gun culture in the US in response to an assignment that was all but asking people to concede to the premise "anyone who doesn't like guns is a bad person", got a zero, and you found out the instructor an NRA member, that would be an important bit of background info to have

 

[RocksInMyHead]

and... is the highest ranking academic officer for the institution going to make decisions willy-nilly?

Has anyone claimed that this decision was made "willy-nilly"? I certainly haven't. I think that it was carefully considered - and wrong.

I don't care about the pronoun rules.

Perhaps you might want to articulate your point then, rather than attempting a gotcha?

I just felt it was worth bringing up to give a contextual backdrop given the nature of the assignment, the critical grade, and the way the TA personally identifies.

It's relevant information, but hardly significant.

If a student wrote a paper critical of gun culture in the US in response to an assignment that was all but asking people to concede to the premise "anyone who doesn't like guns is a bad person", got a zero, and you found out the instructor an NRA member, that would be an important bit of background info to have

You're really hung up on that idea, aren't you? It really doesn't ask the students to concede the premise, as has already been explained to you. But even if it did, part of a well-rounded college education is learning to analyze material that challenges your views.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

You're really hung up on that idea, aren't you? It really doesn't ask the students to concede the premise, as has already been explained to you. But even if it did, part of a well-rounded college education is learning to analyze material that challenges your views.

Yes it does...

The abstract (which apparently simply interviewed a few dozen middle school students) seemed to be designed in such a way that it was all but guaranteeing the outcome of "kids who score lower on gender typicality have poorer mental health outcomes, and it's the fault of those mean old gender norms that society foists on people"

... now please elaborate on why this research is important, how you've seen it negatively impact people in your own lives, and how we can construct future research to help researchers further understand why this is the case

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Yes it does...

What point do you think it asks the reader to concede? Be specific.

The abstract (which apparently simply interviewed a few dozen middle school students) seemed to be designed in such a way that it was all but guaranteeing the outcome of "kids who score lower on gender typicality have poorer mental health outcomes, and it's the fault of those mean old gender norms that society foists on people"

... now please elaborate on why this research is important, how you've seen it negatively impact people in your own lives, and how we can construct future research to help researchers further understand why this is the case

If you're going to pull from the prompt, I'd suggest quoting it accurately and honestly if you want people to take you seriously. Cherry-picking 3 out of 8 suggested approaches (which also included "Discuss why you think the topic is important and worthy of study (or not)" and "Propose alternate interpretations of the researchers' findings") and phrasing them as if they were the sum total of the assignment when students were free to pick any of the suggested approaches or come up with their own is pretty disingenuous.

The requirements were to reference the article in a way that makes it clear that the student read it, react to and/or discuss some aspect of the article, and to do so clearly and within the word limit. Fulnecky's paper did none of those things.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

The basis of the abstract they were tasked with reviewing was framing an oppressed vs. oppressor type scenario based on "gender typicality" was it not?:

...examines whether being high in gender typicality is associated with popularity, whether being low in gender typicality is associated with rejection/teasing, and whether teasing due to low gender typicality mediates the association with negative mental health. Middle school children (34 boys and 50 girls) described hypothetical popular and rejected/teased peers, and completed self-report measures about their own gender typicality, experiences with gender-based teasing, depressive symptoms, anxiety, self-esteem, and body image.

It's not hard to read between the lines.

They were tasked with reviewing a paper, not just the abstract. And there's no need to read between the lines of the abstract when the full paper is available for free: https://kfor.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/12/jewell-brown-2014.pdf

 

[Hans Blaster]

The basis of the abstract they were tasked with reviewing was framing an oppressed vs. oppressor type scenario based on "gender typicality" was it not?:

...examines whether being high in gender typicality is associated with popularity, whether being low in gender typicality is associated with rejection/teasing, and whether teasing due to low gender typicality mediates the association with negative mental health. Middle school children (34 boys and 50 girls) described hypothetical popular and rejected/teased peers, and completed self-report measures about their own gender typicality, experiences with gender-based teasing, depressive symptoms, anxiety, self-esteem, and body image.

I think you are imagining the "oppressor/oppressed" framing. The paper is *not* a study of gender non-typical children, but of attitudes of MS children about gender non-typical children.

It's not hard to read between the lines.

That would be an error. That's not the way scientific papers work.

I went to college, and have younger family members who currently are in college.

I was fortunate enough to graduate about 20 years ago, when the adults were still in charge.

They still are.

...but I still saw a little of the "chip on the shoulder" when it came to the humanities and soft sciences instructors in their treatment of people who were taking the classes because it was a mandatory requirement on the path to something else...especially if that "something else" is "higher up on the social totem pole", and not their primary area of study.

Grad students look down on undergrads generally. It isn't about your major.

(which, from what I've read, this student in question is pre-med)

For now. Like at most universities "pre-med" isn't a major. It's mostly just a collection of courses Med schools want (frosh chem, organic chem, physics, calculus, + biology stuff) that have overlap with many majors.

The course in question is one of 6 core courses that Pysch majors must take 4 and has a frosh Psych pre-req. It's quite possible that her major is psychology. (Alternatively, if she needed another elective and had already taken frosh Psych it might have been a course someone told her was "easy". [I think it was online as well, which may have been a draw if she was still on the tennis team when she registered.])