Maclean's followed up interviews with the presidents of Canada's "Big 5" universities with reactions from the presidents of 7 small and medium-sized institutions -- uWaterloo, Lakehead, uLethbridge, UOIT, STU, SFU, and UoGuelph. Most say they don't believe the Big 5 should become more research-intensive at the expense of other schools. The Big 5 already receive a disproportionate amount of research funding, and if Canada is not satisfied with the research produced to date, the answer isn't further concentration of funding. "Universities serve a very important regional, economic purpose," and most faculty believe research is central to the university experience. The 7 presidents do agree with the Big 5 that Canada's most critical challenge is bringing university-developed research innovation to the marketplace.  Maclean's 

Postscript: Aug 25, 2009
Recent articles in The Globe and Mail and The Chronicle of Higher Education follow up on the series in Maclean's in which the presidents from Canada's "big 5" universities call for a focused national higher-education strategy. The presidents call for more funding for their institutions for research and graduate education. Those opposed to this model say it would establish a tiered university system. Globe and Mail | The Chronicle of Higher Education (subscription required)

Postscript: Aug 26, 2009
The higher-education debate spurred by the presidents of Canada's "big 5" universities, who call for more funding to concentrate on research and graduate education, is the subject of a couple of articles in yesterday's Globe and Mail. Mount Royal College president David Marshall says defining the roles of institutions makes sense so long as schools have equal access to funding. Canadian Association of University Teachers executive director James Turk says the model put forward by the "big 5" presidents would endanger "important pockets of excellence" in Canada. In an opinion piece, Carleton University president Roseann Runte argues that competition and collaboration is a good thing, and a two-tiered university system would limit potential and hamper innovation. Undergrad focus lets students thrive | No to a second-tier educational model