The University of Oklahoma's Social Work Cohort of 2025 is compelled to address a significant concern involving the recent handling of a student's reaction paper. This matter has profound implications for our cohort, given that it directly concerns the integrity and transparency of our academic environment—principles we hold dear.

A fellow student submitted a reaction paper that resulted in a controversial grade and subsequent disciplinary actions against the teaching assistant (TA) responsible for grading the essay. Students indicated that the submitted essay did not meet the assignment criteria or the standards expected in a university-level psychology or social science course. The assignment called for a thoughtful, evidence-based response directly related to the assigned article, demonstrating critical thinking and engagement with research. Instead, the essay relied solely on personal religious beliefs and theological interpretation, without referencing the article’s findings, methodology, or scholarly content. It lacked citations, academic reasoning, or analytical depth. Students also pointed out multiple contradictions within the essay and noted that it contained discriminatory language targeting gender-diverse individuals, which conflicts with university values and widely accepted academic standards. Upon scrutinizing the assignment instructions, the essay itself, and the instructor’s comments, our cohort unanimously concluded that the university’s actions do not align with the realities of the situation. These discrepancies raise questions about fairness, academic freedom, and the processes by which instructors are held accountable.

The cohort highlighted that the instructor’s comments were professional, appropriate, and clearly focused on academic performance rather than personal beliefs. The TA explicitly explained that points were deducted because the paper did not answer the assignment questions, relied on ideology instead of evidence, and used offensive language when referring to marginalized groups. The feedback encouraged further discussion, provided educational resources, and reaffirmed the student’s right to hold personal beliefs while making it clear that academic work must still meet scholarly standards. Another faculty member independently verified the academic validity of the grade.

We believe that this situation reflects a broader issue surrounding the grading and review process, potentially affecting students and faculty across the university. Accurate assessment is pivotal not only to maintain trust in academic evaluations but also to uphold the university's reputation. Mistreated instructors and unjust grades compromise the quality of education and could tarnish our institution’s esteemed standing.

We urge University of Oklahoma administration to:

1. Establish a transparent review process for controversial grades, ensuring both student and faculty voices are fairly represented.

2. Review and potentially revise the current grading and disciplinary policies to prevent similar situations from occurring in the future.

3. Ensure that any decisions regarding disciplinary action against faculty are based on clear, objective criteria, with ample opportunity for affected parties to present their side regardless of political affiliation.

4. Reinstate Mel Curth and Professor Kelli Alvarez. 

By making these changes, the University of Oklahoma can demonstrate its commitment to both academic excellence and fairness, preserving its integrity as a leader in higher education.

We call on all stakeholders—students, faculty, alumni, and supporters of educational integrity—to sign this petition and advocate for a just and equitable academic process. Let us work together to safeguard our institution’s integrity and ensure fair treatment for all members of our academic community. Sign this petition to make your voices heard and drive positive change at the University of Oklahoma.

Respectfully,

Student Representatives on behalf of the Social Work (MSW) program 

University of Oklahoma