Faculty Want Answers on Oklahoma’s Suspension Policies

Through their senate and American Association of University Professors (AAUP) chapter, faculty at the University of Oklahoma are pushing administrators for clarity on the suspension of Mel Curth, a graduate teaching assistant who was put on paid administrative leave last month after a student claimed Curth gave her an unfair grade because she cited the Bible.

Faculty are also asking the university to strengthen its protection of instructors who are politically targeted or harassed. On Wednesday, the faculty senate voted on a vague resolution that doesn’t mention Curth by name but says that “several situations have left faculty and the greater OU community uncertain about the stability and clarity” of university protections against political meddling in teaching and scholarship. It also calls on the administration to “engage with [the faculty senate executive committee] in a review of our procedures for dealing with contentious issues and politically charged situations.” The result of the vote was not announced as of Wednesday evening.

A petition circulated by the University of Oklahoma AAUP chapter makes stronger demands, including that the administration release full details on the processes that led to Curth’s suspension, publicly affirm faculty’s right to teach and research free from political interference, and help develop a “harassment response and prevention plan” for responding to political attacks.

“The recent grading controversy involving psychology instructor Mel Curth has generated widespread alarm among OU faculty, staff, students, alumni, and the broader community,” the petition states. “Specifically, OU’s decision to place the instructor on administrative leave following a routine grading dispute—a decision it has yet to adequately explain—and subsequent failure to defend her from harassment and discrimination, including reported death threats, raises serious concerns about the University’s commitment to educational standards, academic freedom, and instructor safety.”

The dispute between Curth and student Samantha Fulnecky began after Curth gave her a zero on an essay assignment in which Fulnecky used her interpretations of the Bible and personal religious beliefs to critique a scholarly article about bullying and the enforcement of gender norms. According to a university statement, a grading appeals process was conducted and completed.

“The process resulted in steps to ensure no academic harm to the student from the graded assignments. As stated by the student, the two assignments—which together total 35 points out of the entire 1,050 points (3 percent) for the course—have been excluded from the calculation of her final grade,” the statement read.

Fulnecky also filed a religious discrimination complaint with the university’s Title IX office.

“OU has a clear process for reviewing such claims and it has been activated,” the university’s statement read. “The graduate student instructor has been placed on administrative leave pending the finalization of this process.”

Placing employees on administrative leave during a pending Title IX investigation is permitted according to the university’s policy on sexual misconduct, discrimination and harassment.