Insanity

The left is angry (aren’t they always?) because Oklahoma University has suspended one of its professors. Why was he suspended? He gave an assignment to his class on transgenderism. The assignment was a 650-word essay reacting to an article about how people are perceived based on societal expectations of gender.

In her essay, Samantha Fulnecky argued that traditional gender roles should not be considered stereotypes. She cited the Bible to support her stance that eliminating gender in society would be “detrimental” because that would put people “farther from God’s original plan for humans.”

She received a zero on the assignment, not because she didn’t conform to the rubric, but because she didn’t conform to the professor’s opinion. The assignment doesn’t even require the students to be on topic or to apply anything they’re learning from the curriculum to the topic, but rather just to have read and reacted to the article. The grading standard for the assignment was 25 points, based upon the following criteria:

• The paper shows a clear tie in to the assigned article (10 points)
• The paper shows a thoughtful reaction to the article, rather than just a summary of what it said (10 points)
• That the paper was clearly written(5 points)

Here is the paper:

In my opinion, the student DID have a clear tie in, so 10 points there. I would have given probably 7 points on the thoughtful reaction, and perhaps a 2 out of 5 for the last point, because the paper was poorly organized and had some errors in punctuation and format, not to mention that she apparently doesn’t know what a paragraph is. Still, that would have been 19/25, or a 76%, which is solid C.

Ms. Fulnecky responded to the zero she received by filing a complaint for religious discrimination. The professor was suspended and the student’s grade was restored. As it should have been. She did the assignment, and should not be penalized for having an opinion that differed from the professor’s.

The professor gave her a low grade, but he was the one who made an error. I was a teacher for a few years, and I would occasionally give writing assignments just like this one. I would grade the papers based upon their use of logic, writing skill, and proper use of source material. I didn’t care which side of the issue the paper took, as long as it was well written. My mantra was that teachers are here to teach you HOW to think, but not to teach you WHAT to think. This professor isn’t doing that.

Look, the professor asked for a paper on students’ opinions. An opinion piece is just that- an opinion that isn’t based in facts. Some things just aren’t meant to be based upon facts. Some arguments are intractable – issues of personal taste or the subjective importance of certain values cannot be resolved empirically. In an argument like that, once both sides have expressed themselves as clearly as possible, if there is still no agreement then there is nothing left to do but acknowledge there is a disagreement, and leave it at that.

If I am holding a flamethrower and you are holding a lit match, it is true that we can both start fires, but pretending that we can just “agree to disagree” about which is better suited to the task of lighting a candle is nonsense. Had this student made such an argument, she would have been wrong, and deserved the grade she received.

In this case, you are asking students to argue about whether or not we should eliminate the position that a person born with DNA and genitals of a particular sex can be whatever sex or gender that they choose, not just forever, but changing on a day to day basis based upon that person’s feelings on that particular moment. Then you are asking them to apply logic to this, but only the logic of which you personally approve.

This professor deserves what they are getting.