From the Southwest Ledger
As the story of a University of Oklahoma student receiving a zero on an assignment for citing the Bible has become a major national headline, I wanted to weigh in as both a Christian and a professor. Let me say upfront that I have not read the student’s response, seen the assignment, or known anything about past dealings between the student and professor. Because of that, I will not comment on the specifics of her case. Instead, I want to explain how I handle similar issues in my own classes.
In almost every class I teach, students must write a historical argumentative research paper. I am very clear about the types of sources they are allowed to use. In most cases, students must rely on academic, peer-reviewed journals or scholarly books. In the lecture I give each semester on acceptable sources, I explain that if they are writing a paper on Gettysburg, they may not use sites such as the Gettysburg Battlefield website. While that site is created by excellent historians, it is still not an academic publication. I don’t impose these rules out of cruelty; I do it to teach students how to use sources with strong theses, clear arguments, and scholarly rigor. This helps them develop critical reading skills and provides models for the type of writing I and all other professors should expect.
Under these expectations, the Bible would not be an acceptable source for this type of research paper. Even if a student were writing about John Brown and his use of the Bible to justify violence against slaveholders, the student would learn about Brown’s justifications through his letters, others accounts or through scholarly articles. In this case the student should cite the letters or articles, not the Bible. The exception, of course, would be if a student were writing on a biblical figure such as the Apostle Paul; in that case, Paul’s letters would be primary sources and would be acceptable.
Another assignment I frequently give, and one where students struggle a bit more, is an analysis of a historical text. For example, I have assigned students a document in which Thomas Jefferson discusses slavery. It is an important but complicated text, as Jefferson both condemns slavery and expresses beliefs in Black inferiority. The assignment is to identify the document’s thesis and explain how Jefferson supports his ideas. Where students struggle is in wanting to argue that Jefferson was wrong and that slavery is evil. While I absolutely agree with those objections, that is not the purpose of the assignment. I am evaluating whether they understand the argument, not whether they agree with it—which, in this case, I already know they do.
If a student brings his or her own belief system, religious or otherwise, into this type of assignment, they will lose some points. However, I would not fail them. I would deduct points for not following instructions, then explain what they should do differently next time. If the student continued to make the same mistake, the penalties would increase and, eventually could turn into a zero.
Students often think teachers punish them for disagreeing. While I’m sure that happens in some cases, what is more common is that what the student perceives as disagreement is poor evidence. I allow students to write about nearly anything, and I never deduct points because of personal objections. I do, however, deduct points if the argument is historically inaccurate or based on personal opinion not backed by scholarly evidence.
Let me give a couple of examples. I once had a student argue that Jesse James was a Robin Hood figure who robbed banks only to help his community and fight Northern carpetbaggers. The problem is that none of that is true. James was a violent outlaw with an excellent marketing team. It is well documented that he stole for himself, and that a friendly Kansas City journalist wrote flattering stories that protected his image. The student was disappointed when I told him he needed to change his thesis.
I have always told students: you do not have to agree with me, but you do have to support your argument with evidence. In this case, the student could find newspapers, books, and even movies supporting his thesis, but only by ignoring all the evidence to the contrary.
The second example was more sensitive. A student wrote a paper on the history of gay marriage. I had no issue with the topic, and he was a strong student. My concerns were not moral but historical.
In the rough draft, the student inserted personal views about how denying gay marriage violated certain constitutional amendments. At the time, however, the courts had not found such violations, and what mattered in the paper was not the student’s opinion or mine, but the legal record. This resulted in some small deductions. What I taught the student was that instead of writing their 14th Amendment rights were violated, as if stating a personal view, he should write, the lawyers made a case for, or this was the court’s ruling. With those simple adjustments, the student earned full points on the final paper.
If the student had opposed gay marriage, this would still not be a situation where citing the Bible would be appropriate. If the Bible was invoked in a court case as defense for traditional marriage, then the case—not the Bible— should be cited. In short, students should feel free to write on any subject. And if they defend their thesis with accurate, academic research, it should not matter whether the professor personally agrees or not.
There is one other type of assignment I never really use: reflection papers. If I understand correctly, this was the type of assignment in question at OU. In these, students read or watch something and offer their personal reactions. Often these take place on an online discussion board where students respond to one another, creating a dialogue. In this format, statements beginning with “I think,” “I agree,” or “I disagree” are appropriate. This is also the type of writing where citing the Bible is acceptable if it informs others of the student’s personal belief. The problem with these types of assignments is you are opening the door to offense.
Yet as I have written in this column before, the possibility of offense is the price you must accept in college if you want to learn and be challenged. That does not grant license to be rude to other students but respectfully disagree. We as teachers need to model that behavior and not attack students for different or differing opinions.
We live in a complicated world, and teaching has not gotten any easier. Social media has made people angrier, and algorithms convince us we are always right. In this environment, teachers are more important than ever. Our role as educators is not only to teach information, but to help students use it responsibly and to show them how to disagree in ways that still allow us to work together and, ideally, even become friends.
__
James Finck is a professor of American history at the University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma. He can be reached at historicallyspeaking1776@gmail.com.
Historically Speaking 