The workload of most academics involves two main activities: research and teaching. Despite the dual nature of the work, career advancement usually chiefly depends on research performance. Since academics are rational actors, warnings are beginning to emerge that current predominantly research-based performance evaluation systems may be detrimental to creativity and innovation in teaching. This paper investigates the substance of these warnings by revisiting the relationship between research performance and teaching quality. Using a large cross-disciplinary sample of academics within a research-oriented university, we find, consistent with prior evidence, that research productivity is not related to teaching quality, whereas research quality is positively related with teaching quality. These findings discount fears that research-based performance evaluation in academia may be detrimental to teaching quality.