A psychology graduate student instructor was placed on administrative leave at The University of Oklahoma last week after student Samantha Fulnecky filed a claim of illegal discrimination over an assignment grade. The university’s actions and response were unjustified in the circumstances.
Fulnecky’s claim was filed after her essay for a psychology course received zero out of 25 points. The essay referenced the Bible – and no other sources – and argued gender is purely binary using blatantly transphobic language.
The First Amendment is fundamental to the meaning of our nation, but not all freedom of speech is applicable in school settings. You cannot, for instance, write an essay on chimpanzees when the assignment asked you to write about gorillas and claim the freedom of speech guarantees you a good grade.
Similarly, you cannot state gorillas are the same species as chimpanzees without citing any empirical evidence. Claiming your love for gorillas has been discriminated against because your instructor called you out on your error disregards the function of a school setting.
Graduate student instructor Mel Curth failed Fulnecky’s essay because Fulnecky didn’t provide any empirical evidence or answer the assignment’s required questions, and she contradicted her own arguments.
Curth and second-instructor Megan Waldron did give Fulnecky recommendations to be more empathetic, respectful and productively critical in future reports, which are generally important skills to have in psychology disciplines. Fulnecky’s writing was offensive, Curth pointed out in her feedback, as describing any demographic of people as “demonic” because of their identity would be.
However, these recommendations were clarified not to be the focus of her grade as much as Fulnecky’s complete lack of psychological evidence or relevance.
Fulnecky may have easily used her freedom of religion and speech to spew cruel words on her public campus outside of class, where expressing personal opinions is supported and encouraged. That would have been a perfectly legitimate use of the First Amendment, though a harmful one.
But in the case of this class, Fulnecky simply didn’t write a good essay.
We go to school to learn, and sometimes – especially when we don’t follow the instructions provided by our instructors – we get grades we don’t like. Welcome to the consequences of your actions, Ms. Fulnecky!
The claim is laughable, but the results could be morbid.
In a deeply conservative state, publicly accusing a transgender person of discrimination, over 25 points on a transphobic class assignment, publicizes discussion of that person’s identity as transgender. Curth is at risk of public harassment as well as removal from their position.
Turning Point has swiftly reacted in support of Fulnecky, calling Curth “mentally ill” in a statement released on Nov. 27.
Oklahoma University should reinstate Curth’s position, emphasize the different relevance of the First Amendment in school settings and protect its transgender faculty from harassment.
