Over the past few nights, my attention has turned to one news story. Among the endless array of controversies and disasters, something which has caused me to question the direction America is going in regards a university essay that went viral for receiving a 0%.
From afar, the situation sounds like the familiar half-hearted attempt to get credit. In my lifetime, there have been papers from classes I’ve been in that reek of last-minute attempts to cheat the system. I have written some of those papers, and, when I have, willingly accepted the ‘F’ despite initial animosity towards the teacher and the belief that the whole system was out of order. There is nothing like being a frustrating student, though that’s also something you tend to feel when you’re in middle school and not at the university level. By that point, you’re there for personal reasons taking classes that appeal to some larger interests in your life. I get some are probably forced to take courses they don’t want for the sake of credit, but by university, there should still be some sense of academic discipline: to research, to cite, to write.
As someone who has a B.A. in Creative Writing and dealt with hours of workshops where I’ve interacted with papers, both brilliant and lacking, I am sensitive to how this story is being treated. I’ve now seen two videos deconstruct the essay that has been adopted as some attack on religious freedom, that the teacher’s assistant has it out for the writer’s Christian values. Much like the swimmer who turned losing to a trans woman into her whole personality, I find this new, desperate plea for martyrdom to be pathetic. But, to avoid basic condescension, I would like to discuss the essay itself first.
A student at Oklahoma University (OU) came under fire when her essay discussing gender politics received a 0%. This was since adopted by the local branch of Turning Points and turned into an example of how liberals were attacking free speech, which was somehow an effort to suppress Christian ideology. Outside of personal assumptions that this was shorthand for people unwilling to engage with critical thinking, it continues my worry that Christians insist on being victims and can’t imagine a world where they’re just people with a welcoming community. I’ve been to Catholic school. I’ve seen the hospitality they bring. It can be nice, provided they’re not discriminating against others and breaking all sorts of “love thy neighbor” rules they were taught. It's why I’ve always been supportive of the idea of personal faith while condemning national platforms that tend to be controlled by the most insecure branches of religion.
This is an example of insecurity that, in my age, would’ve been something you hid in shame. There was shame in bombing a paper so badly. I get not wanting to look at feedback, but in this example, I find the advice to have been encouraging. Maybe there is reason to put aside pride and notice what the red marks were saying. Allow for advice from someone who has been through the academic system and is trying to improve your skills as a thinker. This was never designed as oppression, but to read an ‘F’ as that is definitely a choice. It suggests that maybe, just maybe, you’re not cut out for university coursework.
I don’t want to edit the essay line by line. What is there is disconcerting in many ways. The most obvious is the structural framework, which lacks a conventional argument essay structure, nor paragraphs written in a palatable, easy-to-understand structure. Sentences contradict each other, and others have repetitive language. This is all first draft mistakes that could be improved upon later, but I’m not sure there was ever a Draft 2. What is here is recognizable to anyone who has written an essay seven hours before the deadline while high on caffeine. There are no citations, no quotes, or engagement with perceived material. It’s entirely opinion-based, suggesting the reader already understands the reference, and there’s no need for extrapolation. It’s vague and, ideally, would’ve led to assistance from a teacher to improve and form a stronger argument.
But it didn’t. Instead, it’s led to potential firings of staff and people who were doing their academic duties. The student has been propped up as a martyr for writing a mediocre paper simply because it had the correct buzzwords. Nobody’s arguing she can’t be religious, but the suggestions she makes about women being subservient to men and God lack any intellectual curiosity and are presuppositions.
Of course, it’s one thing to have the student get hurt about failing so spectacularly. Who hasn’t written a paper that has gotten that negative a reception? When I was in high school, I wrote an essay on a book and received a zero because I had poor reading comprehension. I got better. I learned how to engage with text. I didn’t let my failure define me. Sure, the initial response was to call Henry James a terrible author, but you grow out of that. You see beyond certain limitations in an academic course and find a way to endure. I’ve gone to community college, dropped out, and still managed to come back and take everything seriously. My effort to engage with academia on its terms was not an overnight battle. It’s maybe the biggest reason I’m a supporter of returning to college later in life when your life has settled down.
So much of this student’s life will now be defined by her stubbornness, her unwilling desire to comprehend what the teacher’s aide is saying or acknowledge the complexities of prose. There is no encouragement to evolve from this state of ignorance and develop something better next time. She will always be “that student,” though that’s not the only reason this whole story upsets me.
Everything about this feels more designed to foster the anti-intellectualism movement and make it easier for personal values to not be questioned. The adults, who should objectively know better, have done little to reprimand her and acknowledge that the essay could’ve been improved. Instead, they look at the bad paragraph breaks and run-on sentences and think that it’s the perfect propaganda for their religious cause. I don’t wish to criticize how people express themselves, but I live with the assumption that you might want to present your best self. The reliance on A.I. and poorly argued essays lacks any sense of confidence and is, in some respects, belittling the potential for the young mind to become something greater. I recognize that this might be from the insecure nature of educated people being less faith-based, but maybe religion would be more appealing if it had well-read, empathetic people who listened to criticism populating the news. Say what you will about the new pope, but at least he seems to welcome people with open arms and theological debate.
The adults, to me, feel like they’re performing an act of child abuse for the sake of temporary appeals. This poor student will graduate/drop out and be forever branded as “that student” and never have to alter her way of thinking. There’s encouragement that people who already hate essay writing now have to not try. They can still go to university, but now they’re the ones teaching the teachers who will face scrutiny at backlash for the material. It’s pathetic, and I think it speaks to censorship, which, ironically, was one of the talking points in said essay where the student argued (if for scant words) that nobody should take away free speech before arguing that gender was preordained and not available for greater expression.
I’ve long feared the future of academia in the hands of the current conservative ideology. The push towards A.I. over conventional art, the need to doctor stories so that they fit a movement… it all suggests an inability to address the real world or make a difference. It’s cynical and rewards stubbornness over growth and innovation. I’m not wishing this student to give up being Christian, but I would love to hear a richer argument for her essay. It was poorly structured, lacking any engagement with a world that didn’t already know what she was talking about.
More importantly, it continues the trend of rewarding the wrong values. I get why people are mad about this. I am baffled myself. However, it’s more because I grew up, even as a 2023 graduate, in a time when writing a bad essay meant getting a bad grade. You had no pride in telling the internet, let alone a local branch of anything, that your prose had deeper meaning. I could make fun of her writing, but I’m mostly trying to make sense of why she was even at OU if she wasn’t wanting to dedicate time to curiosity and developing skills. There’s almost no point to her being there when this is what she wants to be known for. I’ve written essays that took 5-10 hours to complete that are now in teachers’ portfolios. To me, that’s something to tell people because it reflects an independent effort to make your own statement and have it matter. I put in the work, so to have someone not try to get propped up as some hero is beyond annoyance.
This isn’t a problem unique to OU, but I think it embodies the greater risk we’re all facing right now. Without care for the people putting in the actual work to better the lives of students, what are we really trying to do in this country? We can’t have the next generation be dumber. If anything, I always believe they should have more access to information and resources that benefit them in ways that I’ve never dreamed. The de-escalation has always been bothersome, and I hope one day soon we get out of it. For now, I am in support of the teacher’s aide who is at risk of losing her job over faulty causes because I believe she’s only doing what was asked of her on the assignment. There’s no reason they should both be losers.
Comments
Post a Comment