Failure to adhere to conventional spelling has academic consequences. When encountering spelling errors, instructors can pass critical judgment on students' writing skills, and even on cognitive abilities. Many students turn to spell checkers. However, we find grading rubrics for academic writing assignments to be inconsistent, and judgments about both quantity and quality of errors to be subjective. In addition, spell check programs are inconsistent in flagging misspellings. Supported by our findings, we question the value placed on spelling mastery and its role as an academic gatekeeper, advocating for more exploration of the role of spelling in academic discourse.