That means he was concerned about the ideological/philosophical content of the product, NOT that it was too simple to fulfill the course requirements.
Had he been concerned about that, he would have used your comparison to a "pancake".
That convinces me that this is a religious freedom issue, not a course requirements issue. The latter is simply a smoke screen invented by the administration (or their lawyer, as in, "You guys had better dream up a bona fide reason for this tout suite . . . or you're TOAST!")
Many people take these courses to make gifts for friends.
This was an instructor who thought he'd shove a kid around to push his personal agenda and was surprised when the kid pushed back.