University Responds To Claims Of Anti-Christian Discrimination
Christian student's gender paper was graded by a TA... student successfully challenged the result
The student alleged that the TA’s personal beliefs resulted in arbitrary grading of the assignment. The school agreed.
Her name is Samantha Fulnecky. She’s a 20yo junior in Oklahoma University, and she was given an essay assignment in her psych course. The topic involved a question of gender, and her essay defended the traditional binary understanding of gender.
The essay, graded by a TA whose pronouns are ‘she/they’ was graded harshly. The student, believing the grade to be related to the position taken, challenged both the grade, and (potential) viewpoint discrimination that was thought to have motivated it.
She had two available approaches to settling the grievance. One was to remove the assignment from the calculation of her final grade. She successfully pushed for that result. The other form of redress was also pursued — a complaint of religious viewpoint discrimination, a practice from which universities are legally prohibited from engaging in.
This week, the school has made a public statement on the matter.
STATEMENT FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA:
A student claim of religious discrimination on an individual assignment in an online graduate-level psychology course 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 incident, it was determined that the grading of this specific paper was arbitrary. The graduate teaching assistant will no longer have instructional duties at the University while additional training is completed.The grade appeal process was completed, and the student was found to have been subjected to arbitrary grading. As a result, the grade on the assignment was removed from the student’s total point value of the class, removing the assignment completely from the student’s record.
The claim of 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 incident, it was determined that the grading of this specific paper was arbitrary. The graduate teaching assistant will no longer have instructional duties at the University while additional training is completed.
The University of Oklahoma remains steadfast in its commitment to academic freedom, which includes the ability to freely express ideas and engage in scholarly inquiry. The University also remains committed to ensuring that all students are graded objectively and fairly, with a focus on teaching students how to think, not what to think. The University will continue to review its teaching practices to ensure that its instructors are equipped to encourage critical thinking, inspire students, and elevate our next generation of scholars without limiting their ability to freely express ideas.
UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA
What is and is not being said in this statement?
Critics are claiming the school prioritized religious sensitivities above academic rigor. That is not what the statement by the school indicates. Their own investigation discovered an ‘arbitrary’ component to the grading process in this instance, and a pattern of bias in past examples. That is why the TA has been relieved of duties.
Has the student successfully claimed she was on the receiving end of Viewpoint Discrimination? That result has not been made public. But the fact that the TA has been pulled from that role indicates a problem serious enough to require a swift and serious remedy.
On the other end, anyone claiming (whether with cheers or dismay) that this TA was fired for her own views, that, again, is not what the statement says. It indicated a deficiency in the grading process that will be followed up with further instruction as to the roles and responsiblities of an instructor.
Presumably, short of an offense serious enough to warrant firing or exposure of the school to further liability, this TA will, after a period of correction, resume teaching duties.
We draw our readers’ attention again to the closing paragraph where the attempt is made to balance both the scholarly independence of instructors and the ability of students to challenge assumptions and orthodoxy without being penalized for it.
The University of Oklahoma remains steadfast in its commitment to academic freedom, which includes the ability to freely express ideas and engage in scholarly inquiry. The University also remains committed to ensuring that all students are graded objectively and fairly, with a focus on teaching students how to think, not what to think. The University will continue to review its teaching practices to ensure that its instructors are equipped to encourage critical thinking, inspire students, and elevate our next generation of scholars without limiting their ability to freely express ideas.
Probably neither side will be entirely happy with this outcome.
Then again, that’s also often true of life in general.
Posts
