In recent decades, the evaluation of the quality of scientific work has increasingly relied on quantitative indicators. The number of publications, citation response, impact factor of journals or other bibliometric indicators make it relatively easy to compare individual researchers, workplaces and entire institutions in one number. At the same time, however, it turns out that such a simple quantitative evaluation can lead to a significant distortion of the quality of scientific work and negative consequences for the economy and society as a whole. In the article, we propose the "teaching impact" indicator, which is basically based on the idea that an article that has been used in teaching for a long time is selected and repeatedly checked by experienced teachers, students and actively shapes future practice and science.
