Remember that OU student—Samantha Fulnecky—who got famous for writing a horrible essay? Well, I do, and today I would like to offer some comments on it.
Here it goes.
Every time a Christian student earns a failing grade on an assignment involving gender or psychology, a familiar chorus begins: accusations of bias, claims of religious persecution, and the terribly loud insistence that the professor must simply hate Christianity. Because of course, what else could explain an F besides “muh rights are being trampled?”
But let’s pump the brakes for a moment.
A failing grade here is not an assault on anyone’s faith. It’s just an accurate evaluation of a poorly written paper.
Full stop.
And to ensure I wasn’t being unfair, I even ran the student’s essay through ChatGPT and it came back with a 9 out of 25. Translation: still an F. Not even a mercy-pass. Not even a Riley Gaines style participation trophy.
And by the way, the model didn’t ding her for being religious. It dinged her because the paper struggled across multiple academic dimensions, including theology.
Where the paper fell apart:
- Lack of engagement with the assigned research
The assignment required interacting with a scholarly article on gender norms and adolescent mental health. Instead of summarizing the study’s methods, findings, and implications, the student offered a devotional reflection that didn’t touch the data at all. Psychology is evidence-based; quoting Genesis (especially without a lick of exegesis) doesn’t substitute for analyzing peer-reviewed research. - Zero use of psychological theory
Upper-division coursework expects familiarity with gender development, peer socialization, minority stress, and mental-health predictors. None of that appeared. Not one concept. Not one piece of evidence. - Argumentation driven by assertion rather than analysis
Statements like “gender diversity is demonic” are not arguments, they’re declarations. Academic writing requires reasoning, nuance, and support. - Inappropriate tone for scholarly work
Labeling sociological phenomena as “lies from Satan” may work in a fundamentalist church small group, but in a psychology classroom it signals that the student is replacing inquiry with dogma. Also, academic papers should not use the word “I” all that much. Sorry, but “I believe” and “I think” isn’t an argument for anything. - And yes, even the theology was weak
This is the part many defenders overlook: the student wasn’t offering robust theological engagement either. She invoked God, sure, but she failed to engage in any historical theology or biblical scholarship. There was no discussion of interpretive tradition, no examination of cultural context, no grappling with the complexities of Genesis, imago Dei, or gender diversity in Scripture. No mention of the eunuchs in Matthew 19 or the declassification of gender in Galatians 3:28. It wasn’t theology; it was slogan-level prooftexting. A thoughtful theological paper would have wrestled with hermeneutics, anthropology, ethics, and the interpretive community. She did none of that.
In other words: the paper didn’t meet academic standards in any direction, neither psychologically, sociologically, or theologically.
So no, this is not religious persecution. This is a professor doing the bare minimum of grading the quality of the work submitted.
If the early Christians survived Nero, if Augustine wrestled with complex anthropology and sexuality, if Paul managed nuanced discourse in first-century Greco-Roman contexts, then surely an undergraduate can survive a reminder that evidence matters and theology isn’t just whatever you felt during quiet time in your fundie Bible study.
The student didn’t fail because she’s Christian. She failed because the paper wasn’t well written or well thought-out. And sometimes the simplest explanation really is the right one.
If you’re navigating faith after certainty, loving Jesus but not the empire, or trying to hold on to hope in a burning world, you’re not alone. I explore these themes weekly on the Heretic Happy Hour podcast.
You can also explore my books—including Heretic!, The Wisdom of Hobbits, and others—right here: https://quoir.com/authors/matthew-j-distefano/
Thanks for reading. Thanks for thinking. And thanks for refusing to settle for easy answers.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In