The University of Oklahoma has made an announcement about the Samantha Fulnecky affair. It’s the wrong one.

A student’s claim of religious discrimination on an individual assignment in an online Psychology Course taught by a graduate teaching assistant has come to resolution. As stated previously, the student followed two available processes at the University: the grade appeals process in the college and she made a formal claim of illegal religious discrimination. As already announced, the grade appeal was decided in favor of the student, removing the assignment completely from the student’s total point value of the class, resulting in no academic harm to the student.
The claim for discrimination has been investigated and concluded. The University does not release findings from such investigations.
At the same time of the investigation, the Provost—the University’s highest ranking academic officer— and the academic Dean reviewed the full facts of the matter. Based on an examination of the graduate teaching assistant’s prior grading standards and patterns, as well as the graduate teaching assistant’s own statements related to this matter, it was determined that the graduate teaching assistant was arbitrary in the grading of this specific paper. The graduate teaching assistant will no longer have instructional duties at the University.
Because this matter involves both student and faculty rights, the University has engaged in repeated and detailed conversations with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee to ensure there is an understanding of the facts, the process, and the actions being taken.
The University of Oklahoma believes strongly in both its faculty’s rights to teach with academic freedom and integrity and its students’ right to receive an education that is free from a lecturer’s impermissible evaluative standards. We are committed to teaching students how to think, not what to think. The University will continue to review best practices to ensure that its instructors have the comprehensive training necessary to objectively assess their students’ work without limiting their ability to teach, inspire, and elevate our next generation.
So the university “investigated” and concluded that the respectful, entirely correct evaluation of the essay by the TA, Mel Curth, was out of line, and has fired her from all of her teaching obligations. I think that means they have lost all of their income, unless they also have a research fellowship. And for what? Because they applied solid academic standards to a student paper and deservedly failed her work.
They haven’t thought through the consequences of this action. Every OU student now has a cheat code: mention Jesus in your crappy essay, and you’ve got an excuse to protest if you don’t get a passing grade. That immediately devalues a diploma from OU. I know I’m going to be sneering at modern OU degrees from now on.
Another consequence is that it’s only going to get worse — Christian fundamentalists will flood into OU, while secular students will look for just about any other university to attend.







