OU Student Receives Zero on Gender-Response Paper; University Opens Review and Places TA on Leave

Summary: A University of Oklahoma junior says she received a zero on a course response paper after defending a Christian view of gender roles. The graduate teaching assistant who graded the work called parts of the essay offensive and said it relied on personal ideology rather than empirical evidence. The university opened a review, implemented a formal grade-appeal process, and placed the graduate instructor on administrative leave while a full-time professor covers the course.

What happened

Samantha Fulnecky, a pre-med junior, submitted a response paper for a lifespan development class that asked students to react to a scholarly article titled "Relations Among Gender Typicality, Peer Relations, and Mental Health During Early Adolescence." The assignment asked for a thoughtful discussion of some aspect of the article and offered suggested approaches such as applying results to personal experience or evaluating whether the topic merits further study.

Key points of the student's essay

Fulnecky wrote from a Christian perspective, arguing that traditional male and female roles reflect intentional design and should not simply be dismissed as "stereotypes." She cited Genesis and discussed the Hebrew phrase ezer kenegdo, describing it as a helper "equal to [man]." She also argued that contemporary claims that people can choose any gender identity are harmful to youth and described that idea as "demonic." Fulnecky said she did not intend to promote bullying and that she wanted children to have identity rooted in faith.

Grading and the TA's response

The assignment was graded out of 25 points with a rubric that allocated up to 10 points for tying the response to the article, up to 10 points for presenting a thoughtful reaction rather than a summary, and up to 5 points for clarity of writing. The paper was graded by graduate teaching assistant Mel Curth (uses she/they pronouns).

Curth wrote that points were deducted because the paper "does not answer the questions for this assignment, contradicts itself, heavily uses personal ideology over empirical evidence in a scientific class, and is at times offensive." Curth also said that calling an entire group "demonic" is "highly offensive, especially a minoritized population."

Curth also disputed the essay's claim that sex is strictly binary, noting that many professional psychological and medical organizations recognize gender and sex as non-binary and not strictly fixed.

Student reaction and escalation

Fulnecky told university administrators she believed the zero reflected punishment for expressing her religious convictions. After the grade was upheld by the TA, she filed a complaint and the matter was escalated through the university's appeal process.

University response

The University of Oklahoma issued a statement saying it takes First Amendment and religious freedom concerns seriously, initiated a full review after receiving notice from the student, and conducted a formal grade-appeal process. The university said steps were taken to ensure no academic harm to the student and that the graduate student instructor has been placed on administrative leave pending finalization of the review; a full-time professor is now serving as course instructor for the semester.

Public reaction

The episode has drawn both support and criticism. Some commentators framed the episode as evidence of bias against conservative or religious viewpoints in higher education; others emphasized the importance of evidence-based argumentation in scientific courses and the need to avoid language that targets minoritized groups. Fulnecky said she has received both encouraging messages and hostile responses online and encouraged other students who face similar situations to speak up.

Current status

The university's review and the formal appeal process are ongoing. Both the student and the graduate instructor have publicly described the exchange differently; university officials say they acted to protect the student's academic standing while ensuring a fair process for all parties.

Note: Names mentioned: Samantha Fulnecky (student) and Mel Curth (graduate teaching assistant). Comments and actions described reflect statements from the student, the teaching assistant, and the university as reported by those involved.