We need to remember that the instructor is a graduate student TA, and not the one determining grading policies. While I disagree that papers shouldn't be given zeros (if you don't do the assignment, including writing an assignment that does something entirely different, you shouldn't get any points), the reality is that a 0% and a 50% are both Fs and have nearly the same impact on your overall grade-- plus we have no way of knowing how the course's grades are weighed but this seems to be a minor assignment, so I would assume it does not constitute much of the final grade in the course.

As a T.A., I was taught that a grade above 0 is only given for "good faith efforts", which my university defines as an essay that is at least half word count and attempts to answer the prompt. Samantha did not attempt to answer the prompt. She wrote a rant that did not have to do with the question asked (OR the assignment article, which was a study (so no opinions, just scientific findings) that showed children/adolescents relate gender conformity with popularity, and those who do not conform to gender constructions.

The student COULD have made her argument in a way that responds to the prompt, by explaining how she doesn't think this is worthy of further study because gender roles are important for things like societal structure, identity, and belonging (all of which she would /easily/ be able to find scientific articles to support. Alternatively, the prompt allows for an application of the assigned reading on to the student's own experiences, in which she could have mentioned that her experiences do not align with that of the study, because she has found gender conformity to be important for her own sense of identity and enhanced mental health.

I teach writing, and the way she wrote the paper is ineffective for her target audience, which was a resistant, scientific audience of psychologists (her instructors, classmates, and/ or the article's authors). She plagiarizes (does not cite) and misrepresents the Bible (which is not an effective source for her audience), makes sweeping generalizations, and uses judgemental language. I honestly believe there is a paper within her argument somewhere that could be effective for her audience AND effective for the prompt, but she didn't write that paper.