TPUSA OU Student Accuses Professor Of Failing Her After Quoting The Bible In Her Essay

A junior at the University of Oklahoma (OU) has accused a professor of failing her simply because she quoted the Holy Bible, a claim now under university investigation.

This case stands at the intersection of several deeply polarising issues: religious expression, academic standards, and rights of LGBTQ+ or gender-diverse individuals.

The controversy erupted in a fraught national climate where debates over transgender rights, gender identity, and the role of religion in public life continue to intensify. The involvement of Turning Point USA (TPUSA), a conservative advocacy group, and the fact that the instructor is transgender have further amplified the stakes.

What Happened: The Essay, the Grade, the Complaint

In November 2025, psychology major Samantha Fulnecky submitted a 650-word reaction essay for a class assignment. The prompt asked students to respond to an article about societal perceptions of gender and how such expectations shape people's experiences.

Rather than engage with empirical evidence or academic research, Fulnecky's essay drew heavily on religious reasoning. She argued that traditional gender roles, male and female, reflect 'God's original plan for humans', warned against gender erasure, and described belief in multiple genders as 'demonic'.

Her instructor, graduate assistant Mel Curth (who uses she/they pronouns), awarded the essay zero out of 25 points. The feedback, shared publicly by the campus branch of TPUSA, said 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 went on to note that 'To call an entire group of people 'demonic' is highly offensive, especially a minoritised population'.

Unhappy with the failing grade, Fulnecky filed a formal complaint alleging religious discrimination. The complaint has now triggered a full review by the university, which has temporarily placed Curth on administrative leave. A full-time professor has been assigned to teach the course for the remainder of the semester.

Investigation, Appeals, and Academic Fallout

In a statement released on 30 November 2025, OU officials emphasised that they take First Amendment protections, including religious freedoms, seriously. They confirmed a 'full review' of the incident is underway, and that a formal grade-appeals process was triggered 'to ensure no academic harm to the student from the graded assignments'.

The university also underscored that the instructor's leave is temporary pending the outcome of the investigation, and that a full-time professor has taken over the course to safeguard academic continuity.

On social media, TPUSA's OU chapter has sided with Fulnecky. In a post, the group criticised the instructor, arguing she 'lacks the intellectual maturity to set her own bias aside and take grading seriously'.

Meanwhile, Fulnecky herself told local media she believed her grade was a violation of her religious freedom. 'I view all my opinions in the world through the Bible', she said, adding she didn't think she should be penalised for holding Christian views.

Academic Standards or Discrimination?

Supporters of Fulnecky paint this incident as a stand for religious liberty and free speech on campus. They argue students should be free to express sincerely held religious convictions, even in assignments, and that penalising them for doing so smacks of ideological bias.

As TPUSA OU put it, 'Professors like this are the very reason conservatives can't voice their beliefs in the classroom'.

Critics argue the issue is not simply religious expression, but the failure to meet academic requirements. According to feedback from the course instructors, Fulnecky's essay did not engage with the assigned article, lacked empirical support, and resorted to religious assertions and sweeping statements about gender identity that many find offensive.

One co-instructor, identified as Megan Waldron, reportedly echoed Curth's conclusions, writing that the paper should not be considered as completion of the assignment. Waldron emphasised that students in academic courses must support their ideas with empirical evidence and reasoned argument, rather than personal ideology.

Some individuals familiar with the course's rubric argue that the zero grade is justified. The assignment instructions specified that students should 'demonstrate that you read the assigned article, and include a thoughtful reaction to the material.' Grading criteria reportedly required a clear tie to the assigned reading, coherent argumentation, and relevant writing.