A commentary argues universities’ reliance on student evaluations of teaching creates distorted incentives and weakens academic integrity. The piece notes that at many institutions student evaluations account for 70% to 100% of teaching assessment, despite evidence showing limited correlation between student ratings and learning outcomes. The author cites research indicating evaluations can be influenced by factors unrelated to instruction quality, including course difficulty and instructor gender, and highlights prior economic evidence that instructors who challenge students may earn lower ratings even when students perform better later. For higher education leaders, the practical risk is cultural: if promotion and contract decisions reward student satisfaction over rigor, institutions may systematically advantage grade inflation and reduce course difficulty—undercutting learning standards.