I’ve been seeing this story pop up here and there and wanted to see what everybody was so upset about.
Luckily, TurningPointOU posted screenshots. The transcripts are below and I’ve rehosted the screenshots on Catbox.
What grade would you have given?
The assignment
(screenshot) You must write a 650 words (body of text), double-spaced reaction paper demonstrating that you read the assigned article, and includes a thoughtful reaction to the material presented in the article. Points will be deducted when papers are deficient in any of these areas. I will deduct 10 points if your paper is between 620 and 649 words, and I will not give credit for papers under 620 words. Papers not turned in by the deadline will not receive credit.
Please remember that your reaction paper should not be a summary, but rather a thoughtful discussion of some aspect of the article. Possible approaches to reaction papers include:
- A discussion of why you feel the topic is important and worthy of study (or not)
- An application of the study or results to your own experiences
(screenshot) There are other possibilities as well. The best reaction papers illustrate that students have read the assigned materials and engaged in critical thinking about some aspect of the article.
Formatting requirements: 12-point Times New Roman or Calibri font, one-inch margins on all sides.
GRADING: Reaction papers are graded on a 25-point scale, and are evaluated based on the following:
- Does the paper show a clear tie-in to the assigned article? (10 points)
- Does the paper present a thoughtful reaction or response to the article, rather than a summary? (10 points)
- Is the paper clearly written? (5 points)
Samantha's paper
(screenshot) This article was very thought provoking and caused me to thoroughly evaluate the idea of gender and the role it plays in our society. The article discussed peers using teasing as a way to enforce gender norms. I do not necessarily see this as a problem. God made male and female and made us differently from each other on purpose and for a purpose. God is very intentional with what He makes, and I believe trying to change that would only do more harm. Gender roles and tendencies should not be considered “stereotypes”. Women naturally want to do womanly things because God created us with those womanly desires in our hearts. The same goes for men. God created men in the image of His courage and strength, and He created women in the image of His beauty. He intentionally created women differently than men and we should live our lives with that in mind.
(screenshot) It is frustrating to me when I read articles like this and discussion posts from my classmates of so many people trying to conform to the same mundane opinion, so they do not step on people’s toes. I think that is a cowardly and insincere way to live. It is important to use the freedom of speech we have been given in this country, and I personally believe that eliminating gender in our society would be detrimental, as it pulls us farther from God’s original plan for humans. It is perfectly normal for kids to follow gender “stereotypes” because that is how God made us. The reason so many girls want to feel womanly and care for others in a motherly way is not because they feel pressured to fit into social norms. It is because God created and chose them to reflect His beauty and His compassion in that way. In Genesis, God says that it is not good for man to be alone, so He
(screenshot) created a helper for man (which is a woman). Many people assume the word “helper” in this context to be condescending and offensive to women. However, the original word in Hebrew is “ezer kenegdo” and that directly translates to “helper equal to”. Additionally, God describes Himself in the Bible using “ezer kenegdo”, or “helper”, and He describes His Holy Spirit as our Helper as well. This shows the importance God places on the role of the helper (women’s roles). God does not view women as less significant than men. He created us with such intentionally and care and He made women in his image of being a helper, and in the image of His beauty. If leaning into that role means I am “following gender stereotypes” then I am happy to be following a stereotype that aligns with the gifts and abilities God gave me as a woman.
(screenshot) I do not think men and women are pressured to be more masculine or feminine. I strongly disagree with the idea from the article that encouraging acceptance of diverse gender expressions could improve students’ confidence. Society pushing the lie that there are multiple genders and everyone should be whatever they want to be is demonic and severely harms American youth. I do not want kids to be teased or bullied in school. However, pushing the lie that everyone has their own truth and everyone can do whatever they want and be whoever they want is not biblical whatsoever. The Bible says that our lives are not our own but that our lives and bodies belong to the Lord for His glory. I live my life based on this truth and firmly believe that there would be less gender issues and insecurities in children if they were raised knowing that they do not belong to themselves, but they belong to the Lord.
Trans professor's comments
(screenshot) Mel Curth (She/They)
November 16, 2025 at 2:04 PM
Please note that I am not deducting points because you have certain beliefs, but instead I am deducting point for you posting a reaction paper that 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. While you are entitled to your own personal beliefs, there is an appropriate time or place to implement them in your reflections. I encourage all students to question or challenge the course material with other empirical findings or testable hypotheses, but using your own personal beliefs to argue against the findings of not only this article, but the findings of countless articles across psychology, biology, sociology, etc. is not best practice. You argue that abiding by normative gender roles is beneficial (it is perfectly fine to believe this), but to then say that everyone should act
(screenshot) the same, while also saying that people aren’t pressured into gendered expectations is contradictory, especially since your arguments reflect a religious pressure to act in gender-stereotypical ways. You can say that strict gender norms don’t create gender stereotypes, but that isn’t true by definition of what a stereotype is. Please note that acknowledging gender stereotypes does not immediately denote a negative connotation, a nuance this article discusses. Additionally, to call an entire group of people “demonic” is highly offensive, especially a minoritized population. You are entitled to your own beliefs, but this isn’t a vague narrative of “society pushes lies,” but instead the result of countless years developing psychological and scientific evidence for these claims and directly interacting with the communities involved. You may personally disagree with this, but that
(screenshot) doesn’t change the fact that every major psychological, medical, pediatric, and psychiatric association in the United States acknowledges that, biologically and psychologically, sex and gender is neither binary nor fixed. I implore you apply some more perspective and empathy in your work. If you personally disagree with the findings, then by all means share your criticisms, but make sure to do so in a way that is appropriate and using the methodology of empirical psychology, as aligned with the learning goals in this class. If you have any additional questions or concerns about this or would like some additional educational resources, I would be happy to discuss this further and provide you with them.
Additional professor's comments
(screenshot) Megan Waldron (She/Her/Hers)
November 16, 2025 at 3:09 PM
Samantha, I am the other instructor for this course, and I have also taken the time to read your paper. I concur with Mel on the grade you received. This paper should not be considered as a completion of the assignment. Everyone has different ways in which they see the world, but in an academic course such as this you are being asked to support your ideas with empirical evidence and higher-level reasoning. I find it concerning that you state at the beginning of your paper that you do not think bullying (“teasing”) is a bad thing. In addition, your paper directly and harshly criticizes your peers and their opinions, which are just as valuable as yours. Disagreeing with others is fine, but there is a respectful way to go about it. That goes for discussion posts as well as reaction papers. Please employ more thoughtfulness in your future assignments.
Why the fuck does Samantha need an education at all?
First of all, Jesus provides everything.
Second of all, she’s a woman and her place is in the kitchen making sandwiches and birthing babies. Not studying demonic science.
Amen! 🙏
Getting a professor fired for having your essay flunked for quoting the bible in a science essay. We’ve been too tolerant on christian dogmas.
A Christian dogma is to not prosecute other people.
God didn’t made women “beauty” (like she says) because God is beauty.
I think the Issue is that christian dogma is being used widely to persecute people, and infiltrate circles of power. Civilized countries have secular government and education for a reason!
The issue is pretty much greed. There are certain elements of humanity that are so greedy (hungry for power, for money) that they cope every single religion, ideology and turn them to satisfy their own need.
Any belief is a door for someone else to exploit.
Even as a species we are pure uncontrolled greed, maybe because of who we are led by, maybe because that’s how we are as a group.
While I think this is important. She’s just gonna go start some Hawk Tuah podcast from all the PR
An attempt was made. It’s clear that at least the student read the article from the assignment, and turned something in. The fact that it doesn’t answer the question and is generally substanceless from an academic standpoint is where the points should be deducted from.
A zero is probably too harsh. I would grade it as a fail, but give the student extra time to submit a revised version. Using the professor’s grading scale, that would be a 5 for #1 (she did read the article and her reaction to it had some tie-in to the subject material, it was just insufficient), a 0 for #2 (She avoided summarizing, but failed to provide a “thoughful reaction or response”, as most of her writing was merely dismissive and not constructive) and a 5 for #3 (It was clearly written, I’ll give her that much). So 10 points out of 25 total, or 40%, which is a fail.
I think this student would be happier in seminary school, not university.
She would have still received a 0 because of the 10 point deduction for not meeting the minimum word count. The requirement was 650 words and her word count was 630.
Oh, I completely forgot about that. You’re right, that 10 point deduction would have caused the grade to fall to exactly 0.
I was trying to be magnanimous, but ultimately I think both professors have the right of it. This student never intended to participate in the class in good faith - the barbed submission was intentionally baiting out a failing grade and negative response from the professor so that it could be used as fuel for the political culture war.
She wouldn’t be happier in seminary school, she’d be happier as a right-wing influencer. That’s what this is all about. Her mom is a lawyer that defended people involved with the January 6th insurrection. She had contacted right-wing media before she appealed the grade with the University.
She’s not smart enough to write above a fifth grade level but she’s smart enough to get in on the grift. This is getting her name out there and this will not be the last we hear from this woman.
Edit: Ask yourself what a “devout Christian” that only believes in two genders was even doing taking a gender studies course in the first place? It was all planned.
I don’t think it was about quoting bible as much as it was about not answering the question ngl.
Also never quoted the Bible, just stayed their interpretation of it without referencing any specific scripture.
Also, no internal citations in the text, that’s an instant zero on any college level essay.
I used to teach community college sociology. Even as a reaction paper, that is not college level work. I would have given the student one redo.
Man, God must have weak ass plans if only a few trans people can undo it.
This is why graduate student and teaching assistant unions exist. I’d dare this student to contest a zero on a paper that is flatout plagiarism.
No academic sources
Use of first person throughout
Academic writing conventions not present
More a reflection than reaction
Sorry but unless this is a foundation student they’re getting a 35%.
The irony is, if she had gotten a 35% that would have been the end of it. This whole thing blew up because she got a 0. That’s why I feel like 0’s should never be given on an assignment unless literally nothing was turned in. A 0 comes off as personal; even in cases like this where the person absolutely deserves to fail, it casts doubt on the impartiality of the grader.
But giving a 35%? Well that’s different. That’s acknowledging the person attempted the assignment, they just did a pathetically shit job at it. In some ways, it’s more humiliating than a 0, because the grader at least tried to give you some credit, but is still highlighting how fucking stupid you are.
I agreed with you for a few minutes; but now I think that the 0 is the correct score based on the instructions.
Initially, I read what she wrote and came to the conclusion that she should probably get at least 3 points out of the available 5 points to the question, “is the paper clearly written?” It is. It’s insane to try to refute that. She should get at least something here. If clarity is the only qualifier, sure, let’s give her a 5.
“Does the paper show a clear tie in to the article?”
Eh… it knows what the article is about at least, so maybe 1 point.
“Does the paper show a thoughtful response…”
No, not really… but there are words here, so maybe 1 point again.
She’s at a 7/25, so, 28%. The problem for her was this part…
I will deduct 10 points if your paper is between 620 and 649 words
630 words means 10 points are deducted. If there’s only 7 available… well, that’s how you get a 0%.
I think that is all correct, but still might find some way to rationalize up to a non zero final grade, just because of the extreme optics while something like a 3/25 is for all intents and purposes just as bad but just “looks” better.
But frankly the students intent from the second of reading the assignment was likely to leverage the assignment to cry woke and go to Internet no matter what.
I got a zero on a paper my freshman year of college, for not citing sources in my writing. I learned from that mistake and did better for the rest of my academic career.
She’s a junior, she should know that by now.
I’m a very generous marker, generally I look for any merit and credit where I can within the scheme.
A 0 is a very strong statement saying “you produced nothing of value”, and it’s very very rare to hand out. In the case of a deduction, normally you tell them their grade pre-penalty to at least signal what was worthwhile with the aim of helping the student grow.
Hell, based on the quality of writing she is probably used to scores like 35%.
The prompt specifically requested a personal reaction.
A personal reaction in an academic style is analytic in nature and rarely autobiographical. It links the content to the literature shaping one’s views.
The brief also specified it as critical, which at undergrad levels means exploring literature views and synthesizing rather than just vomiting a stream of consciousness unrelated to the course content.
Her paper would have been perfectly appropriate, if she was taking a Bible studies course. Definitely not appropriate for a psychology course though, unless faith was included in the topic of the article she was asked to read.
Still then a problem as a Bible studies. Just vague expression of their belief without citing the Bible.
It wouldn’t’ve even passed a bible studies course because she didn’t even quote the bible.
The girl is a dumber than a sack of rocks, how did she ever get out of school?
She will probably get an honorary Doctor Of MAGA from Trump Looniversity.
Our new Director of Gender Enforcement
I’m really impressed by the grader’s response. They didn’t just fail her for not doing the assignment, but broke down why and how her rhetoric is flawed. The fact the school couldn’t stand behind this clear and concise feedback just means that Oklahoma doesn’t really care about the quality of the work done at their school.
We’ve been turning public schools into diploma mills for a while now. This is just another step towards the Liberty University-ification of the national academic system.
I mean it is Oklahoma, we couldn’t possibly expect more of them… :/
I wish their accreditation could be revoked for this.
should
Oklahoma, the state Missouri thanks god for.
Their written response is great but I would’ve flagged this with my boss.
That’s definitely fair criticism, but its sad that bringing in their boss should be necessary in a situation like this.
🌎👨🚀🔫👨🚀
In what sense did she not do the assignment? Which aspects of the grading rubric do you think she failed at? Her rhetoric may be flawed, but that wasn’t part of the assignment. You could argue that flawed rhetoric is bad writing, but that’s only 5 points of the assignment out of a total of 25.
Well, the TA does a pretty good job explaning where it is lacking.
I don’t think this would be acceptable in a theological course because it is hot garbage, let alone a sociology(?) course.
Well, the TA does a pretty good job explaning where it is lacking.
Again though: Which aspects of the grading rubric do you think she failed at? The TA talks about things that aren’t on the grading rubric, or if they are they fall under “bad writing” which is only worth 5 points.
you are confusing the assignment and the grading.
they are two separate things.
the assignment was:
- A discussion of why you feel the topic is important and worthy of study (or not)
- An application of the study or results to your own experiences
the submission failed on both these points, and thus it is automatically disqualified, no grading is even applied.
there was no discussion in the submission.
“discussion” in an academic context is a technical term that means “examining a topic based on evidence from some point of view”. you may have encountered something similar in school as a pro/contra essay. in academia this gets expanded on by requiring evidence in the form of citations in order to support one’s positions and conclusions (or lack thereof).
since the student did not provide sources, this point of the assignment is not fulfilled.
the same goes for the second point, for the same reasons: insufficient evidence was provided.
the teachers explain this in their response.
since neither part of the assignment is fulfilled no grading is applied: it’s an automatic failure.
this is also explained in the response.
you may want to carefully read the responses again, and keep in mind that all of this is happening in an academic context. providing evidence is expected by default.
“i believe”, “i feel”, 'the bible says", etc., are NOT evidence in a scientific context…
Nice breakdown, I’ve seen a couple people commenting that are missing the fact that quoting a personal religious belief isn’t the same as empirical evidence to back up an arguement.
Not to mention it feels more like the student was just trying to personally attack the TA.
yes, exactly!
what i think is rather important to point out:
even in theology this shit wouldn’t fly!
that’s how absurd this “controversy” is.
because even in theology you need to provide sound argumentation and sources. even there you need more evidence than this “student” submitted.
it’s just…so, so absurd.
I think defining discussion here is the critical point. If someone take the assignment literally, they don’t need to provide arguments to describe how they feel about the topic in the article.
Since this part can be interpreted differently, the students should get some points. Or ask the resubmit their papers with “scientifically supported evidence”
the problem here is that this is in a university setting.
the student has almost certainly been made aware of what “discussion” means.
i explained in a different comment (check my profile if the link doesn’t work, not sure how to properly link comments…) why this is not a sufficient excuse.
because the previous comment seemed well received, I’ll try to give another example of how this sort of course might generally play out:
at a typical university you’ll get some general orientation at the beginning of the first semester. this will include things like the rules for exams, the rules for the campus, the rules for the dorms (if there are any), the rules for general conduct and behavior on-campus, and a ton of other shit like safety drills in case of a fire or other catastrophe, laboratory training (if relevant), and on and on. there’s a LOT to cover in the first few weeks. you’ll probably sign a bunch of forms that say “i have read the rules” in legalese, so that there is proof that you have been made aware of the rules.
this orientation will include, or be closely followed by, a class on scientific work.
this course will cover the scientific method, scientific literature, scientific citations (in the specific style of your field and university), the formatting of all your submissions (there’s usually a template you are supposed to use, though this is somewhat dependant on the teacher of any given class.)
there will also be sections on scientific language: the difference between a scientific theory and a “theory” in casual language, what a scientific paper really is and how to tell the difference between a high quality and a low quality paper (or if the paper is just complete nonsense.), and so forth.
this is were the student in the OP almost certainly learned how the assignment given was supposed to be written.
there’s literally entire classes for this specific thing.
and yeah, that’s because it’s actually difficult to do properly!
there’s nothing “unfair”, or “unexpected”, or “insufficiently clear” about this work assignment.
it can seem that way to someone who hasn’t been to university, but to everyone who has, it’s clear as day.
there is never a need to point out things like “you need to use proper citations in your work”, or “you need to follow the scientific method”, because this has already been covered and is then expected in damn near every assignment afterwards.
it’s the expected standard.
so there are two possibilities here:
either the student hasn’t absorbed the material of the previously mentioned class, and just kinda winged it, hoping for the best, and is thus simply an exceedingly bad scientist, which means the failure was entirely deserved.
…or they did it on purpose, and the failure was entirely deserved.
my money is definitely on the latter.
TL;DR:
she damn well knew this submission would be disqualified.
because all students know this.
it’s literally the scientific method, and thus one of the very first things they teach you at university.
hope this clears up why none of this is explicitly mentioned in the assignment, but feel free to ask more questions!
You can claim that there are requirements that are not mentioned anywhere in any of the instructions given to the students, but there’s no evidence for that in what they were actually given.
the evidence is: this is a university course.
this is normal for every university in the world. everyone that’s ever taken a university course knows this.
it’s quite literally the scientific method.
it’s almost never spelled out anywhere, because students generally have dedicated courses that teach this method and related things like researching, proper citations, writing structures and styles, etc.
usually called something like “scientific working” or something (don’t know what it’s called in english, german is usually something like “wissenschaftliches arbeiten”).
this isn’t kindergarten; there are prerequisites and they are expected by default.
these aren’t children, they’re adults.
and everyone involved knew this in advance.
this is not “hidden” or “secret”.
it’s a standard.
There is no requirement listed that the assignment be written in English, or submitted on paper. An assignment written in Latin on the side of a cow (with a 1 inch margin) is not explicitly forbidden.
The rubric gives only a small amount of context. Do you think it should explicitly say “contains college-quality writing?”
I usually put that crap in the syllabus.
People analyzing the content of the paper and trying to justify the grade are missing the point. Imagine someone submitted a well researched, beautifully written paper criticizing the Bible in one of the christian universities and got 0 points. Imagine they then complained on twitter. Would the teacher be suspended and investigated? Obviously not.
This is not a story about grading papers. This story is about well organized right-wing student organizations using their influence to impose their ideology on everyone. This story is about US shifting father and farther to the right because corporate America works with conservatives to silence the progressive ideology and the left not having structures to do anything about it. (This would be a good place to talk about Charlie Kirk shooting but I don’t really know what to say. It’s definitely not the right way to do it but it’s also the only thing done recently that had some effect).
First of all, the term “reaction paper” is quite vague to me. I understand it’s a thing now to “react” to content, facts, but the verb, to react, implies very little critical thinking. I think this is one of those concepts brought by the content creator trend to enhance the amount of engagement and earnings by producing derivative and lazy content.
Being said that, yes. If you attend a scientific class, you can’t argue based on your personal beliefs only. Religious, biblical truths don’t have any special weight here. It’s quite shocking that this can happen at a university level, and that’s why I’m absolutely opposed to non-secular education in general. Religion and education must always be separated.
A “reaction” isn’t necessarily a brain rot veil for copyright infringement.
Who said that?
This paper was terrible. It’s full of sentence fragments, run‑ons, and generally inconsistent grammar and lots of repetition and weak structure. It relies almost entirely on vague Bible references without citing specific passages or any psychological research, despite making claims about youth mental health and gender. And besides the fact it doesn’t follow the assignment at all, it’s just horribly written.
