University Graduate Survey 2004

FIRST, LET ME START with a little history. It was 13 years ago this fall that Maclean's first ventured into the complicated, controversial and, yes, highly political business of ranking Canadian universities. The motivation was partly personal.

University Graduate Survey 2004

FIRST, LET ME START with a little history. It was 13 years ago this fall that Maclean's first ventured into the complicated, controversial and, yes, highly political business of ranking Canadian universities. The motivation was partly personal. Two editors, both fathers of boys in their last years of high school, were hungry for some comparative information. Basic facts - like average entering grades and student-faculty ratios. Data on scholarships and bursaries, per student. Information they couldn't find in those glossy campus brochures. They set about doing a top-to-bottom ranking of 46 universities across the country and, as it turned out, they weren't the only ones looking for facts. When that first ranking hit the newsstands, it sold out in three days. Three hours, in some cities. So unprepared was Maclean's for that response that it took weeks to arrange a second printing. Barbara Frum called the magazine to rave. "Everyone's talking about it," she told one editor. "It's a bombshell."

No kidding. While that first ranking struck a huge chord with Canadians, who were more than curious to learn how their publicly funded institutions measured up, the UNIVERSITY community reacted with howls of outrage. Even David Johnston, then principal of the top-ranked McGill, conceded that the ranking was a little "blunt." Others were less polite, calling the data completely meaningless, the methodology fatally flawed. The country might not have any Harvards, but neither did it have any Pineapple U's. All Canadian universities were created equal, all were universally good - if not excellent - and what Maclean's was doing was punitive in the extreme.

And most punitive of all? Lumping a diverse group of universities, from little Mount Allison in Sackville, N.B., to a massive research powerhouse like the University of British Columbia, in a single top-to-bottom list. Like comparing apples with pears and oranges. More than one university president told us: if you want to judge us, why don't you just talk to our grads? You'll see how satisfied they are.

Still, there were those who encouraged Maclean's to improve and continue. "You've precipitated a process that is very useful," said David Strangway, then president of UBC. And so, in 1992, Maclean's editors went back to school. Over a period of six months, two of us crossed the country, doing a crash course in higher education, consulting with university officials and experts in every region. With help, we sorted the apples, pears and oranges, creating three distinct peer groupings of Canadian universities - groupings whose titles are now part of the popular lexicon: Primarily Undergraduate, for those largely focused on undergrads; Comprehensive, for those offering a wide range of undergrad and graduate programs, plus professional degrees; and finally, the Medical-Doctoral category, for those universities with all that the Comprehensives have to offer, plus medical schools.

Over those same six months, we hammered out the finer details of 22 ranking indicators, measures of excellence. Above all, the one we wanted to nail down was a measure of graduate satisfaction. Or, to use ranking lingo, the big "output measure." It eluded us: the costs were prohibitive and the privacy issues were too complex. Instead, we opted for a less-than-perfect surrogate - alumni giving.

When that second ranking appeared in 1992, Mel Elfin, the avuncular founding editor of the U.S. News & World Report rankings, called to congratulate me on the changes we had made. But he also offered a stern word of advice: "Don't publish your rankings every year. Canada's too small. There aren't enough universities, and they're all public. Nothing will ever change."

Well, as it turns out, Mel couldn't have been more wrong. When it comes to post-secondary education in Canada, the whole world has shifted since the early '90s. What we have witnessed is nothing less than a revolution - a revolution on a global level, a national level and, most definitely, on a personal level. On a global level, there has been a knowledge revolution: brains are now the commodity with which we compete. On a national level, universities and their students have weathered a funding revolution: between 1992-93 and 1997-98, governments in Canada slashed $1.2 billion out of post-secondary operating budgets. And while there has been some reinvestment, the overwhelming growth in participation has meant that government funding per student has never been lower in Canadian history. In 1992, per-student funding was $10,300. Today, it sits at $8,000.

In fact, in constant dollars, governments are providing the same total investment as they did in 1992. The big problem? There are an additional 215,000 full-time students in Canadian universities - and roughly no change in the number of full-time faculty to teach them. Meanwhile, the cost of going to university has gone through the roof.

In other words, Mel, everything has changed. And for that reason, we decided this year it was essential to seek out the voice of the one group we were most interested in hearing from: namely, recent graduates of Canadian universities.

We wanted to know: just how satisfied were they with their university experience? With the teaching and the learning environment? The libraries? The student services? How about the extracurriculars? Would they recommend their alma mater to a friend or relative interested in the same sort of studies? Was their university experience of significant benefit to their life? We wanted to hear all this from the horse's mouth - but doing so was no mean feat. The challenge: how to reach the grads without having access to their addresses or being able to speak to them directly. How could we record their views, and protect their anonymity?

From the start, it was clear that we should canvass the opinions of those who had had a chance to use their rear-view mirror to reflect on what they had learned. Or, as one Halifax-area president put it: "Those who've had time to find a job and make a bit of a dent in their student debt." For that reason, we chose the graduating classes of 1999, 2000 and 2001.

From there, we turned to two key experts: Angus Reid, president of Angus Reid Consultants and a noted expert in the field of survey research, for advice on all aspects of the survey, from questionnaire design to sampling methods; and Janet McDougall, president of McDougall Scientific Ltd. - a specialist in clinical trials, respected for her ability to manage data in a secure and reliable way. McDougall suggested we use a telephone-based interactive voice response (IVR) system, which would be customized to meet the demands of those surveyed as well as the need for reliability and confidentiality. To access the survey, participants would require an individualized personal identification number. Once they completed the survey, the PIN would be deactivated.

The key relationship in this project, however, was with the universities themselves. In agreeing to move forward, and contact their grads, they were our true partners. Many applauded our initiative. Several encouraged us to fold the results into the annual ranking. With one exception - York University - all agreed to take part. In September, following Reid's random sampling instructions, each university sent letters to their selected graduates, inviting them to participate.

So far, so good. But after months of work, the million-dollar question remained: would they pick up the phone and call? On the morning of Sept. 10 - the day the 1-800 phone lines went live - I was not at Maclean's. Like many other parents that week, I was barrelling down the highway, dragging a U-Haul packed to the rafters with hand-me-down furniture, IKEA bookshelves and vintage LPs, heading to a university town to drop off my son. At 11:30, the cellphone rang. It was McDougall: "From the minute we went live, the lines lit up like a Christmas tree. I think you might consider doubling them."

We doubled the lines, and then doubled them again. Over 40 days this fall, they were open, 24/7. In the end, 12,334 graduates completed the Maclean's University Graduate Survey: 10,884 in English and 1,450 in French.

So what did they tell us? In terms of grading the quality of teaching and the learning environment, the grads of the small Primarily Undergraduate universities were particularly positive. Under teaching, 10 of the top 15 spots were filled by institutions with a full-time student population of 5,000 or less. Overall, 52 per cent of respondents considered their teaching "very good" and 49 per cent gave the learning environment the same nod.

But when it came to grading student services, they were much less satisfied. On average, only 35 per cent gave their alma mater top marks. Once again, the Primarily Undergraduate universities topped the charts, but there were two universities in the other two categories - Western and Guelph - that outshone their peers. As for the extracurricular environment, grads were relatively critical as well. Again, Western and Guelph distinguished themselves along with Mount Allison, Bishop's and Queen's. Not surprisingly, when it came to assessing the quality of the library, the graduates of the large Medical-Doctoral universities - those with proportionately large holdings - were among the most satisfied.

The real message in the survey, however, emerges when you look at how the graduates responded to the last three questions. When asked how they would rate their entire educational experience, 60 per cent responded "very good." Fully two-thirds said they would definitely recommend their university to someone wanting to pursue similar studies. And when asked if their university experience was of significant benefit to their life today, 77 per cent responded "definitely yes." Add in the number who said "probably yes," and the total hits 95 per cent - the greatest concurrence on any question in the survey.

In other words, while less than 50 per cent were fully satisfied with certain key aspects of their university experience, graduates gave the total package a ringing endorsement. And perhaps equally newsworthy: the endorsement was high across the nine major fields of study, whether they graduated from arts and science or engineering, education or medicine.

Which, let's face it, is extremely timely news. Consider the fact all those who participated in the survey are commenting on experiences that predate the fall of 2001. Consider also that since that time, Canadian universities have added a further 130,000 full-time students - including the three biggest incoming classes in the country's history. Even those provinces with declining university-age populations - Newfoundland, New Brunswick and Quebec - have witnessed sizable growth in recent years.

Demand for university education is at an all-time high. It will only grow as participation rates continue to increase and the biggest classes in Canadian history move on to expensive professional and graduate programs. And yet, while the Americans have boosted their government funding to public universities by 25 per cent since 1980, Canadians have decreased theirs by 20 per cent.

There isn't a hope in Hades that funding has kept up with quality - let alone capacity. Take Alberta, where the number of qualified applicants turned away from the province's three major universities doubled between 1998 and 2002. This fall, the province boosted base funding to the universities by four per cent, and new spaces were created. Still, there is unmet demand. Having declared itself debt-free, will Alberta have the wisdom to reinvest in its future? "Ministry people now smile when they say they don't have any money," says Carl Amrhein, provost and vice-president (academic) at the University of Alberta. "They've told me very plainly, 'If you can convince the voters that post-secondary is a high priority, the government will be happy to move more money your way.' "

Persuading the voters may be the issue. Increasingly, a number of high-profile voices are beginning to make themselves heard on this subject. This spring, Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty asked one of his predecessors, Bob Rae, to conduct a massive review of the province's post-secondary system - home to 40 per cent of Canadian students and low man on the totem pole when it comes to government funding. This fall, Rae has been crossing the province, hosting a series of town hall meetings and round-table discussions. His toughest job? "Convincing the public that reinvestment is urgent," says Rae. "It's going to take leadership to make change. But if we don't do something, we're going to fall further behind." He pauses. "The deterioration in quality has been very quiet."

Rae is right. We sit at a crossroads, and our future is at stake. Now, thousands of graduates have registered a clear message about quality: what worked for them - and what did not. For all our sakes, their opinions should be taken seriously. If they are, the biggest winner in the new Maclean's survey just might be university education itself.

Measures of Excellence

While fewer than half of the 12,334 graduates were fully satisfied with certain key aspects of their academic and extracurricular experience, more than three-quarters gave a ringing endorsement to the benefits of going to university.

QUESTIONS ON QUALITY

On the first six questions, the graduates were offered a choice of five responses: very good, good, poor, very poor and no opinion. The figures below represent the percentage of participants who responded "very good."

1 Teaching and Instruction 52%

2 Learning Environment 49%

3 Library Resources 44%

4 Student Services 35%

5 Extracurricular Environment 38%

6 Entire Educational Experience 60%

QUESTIONS OF ENDORSEMENT

In responding to the final two questions, the graduates were offered a choice of five responses: definitely yes, probably yes, probably not, definitely not and no opinion. The figures below represent the percentage of participants who responded "definitely yes."

7 Would you recommend this university to a friend or relative interested in a similar course of studies? 66%

8 Thinking back on your time at university, do you feel this experience was of significant benefit to your life today? 77%

The Maclean's University Graduate Survey: How It Was Done

The graduates were randomly selected from the classes of 1999, 2000 and 2001. They were chosen by each of the universities using guidelines developed by Maclean's and its advisers. Angus Reid, president of Angus Reid Consultants, developed a stratified random sampling plan for each of the 46 participating universities. These guidelines specified the number that would be invited to participate, both at the undergraduate and graduate level, by year and program, and how the sample was to be chosen.

Each university then sent letters to the selected grads, inviting them to participate. To ensure that only those who had been chosen could take part, each grad was provided with a unique personal identification number. This PIN and the accompanying university identification number were required to access the telephone-based interactive voice response (IVR) survey.

In the end, there was a 17-per-cent response rate. The results, when presented for all universities, were accurate within 1.15 per cent, 19 times out of 20, while the individual institutional accuracy varied from plus or minus 4.5 per cent to plus or minus 8.85 per cent. It should be noted: when interpreting results, there may be non- response biases if certain groups of grads were less likely to participate. In order to minimize these biases, the survey data were statistically weighted by program within each university.

According to Reid, the overall response rate exceeds industry norms for this type of survey: "It's rare to obtain better than a 10-per-cent response rate from surveys sent through the mail. The innovative use of the telephone and the obvious interest of graduates in this important subject likely accounts for this high rate."

Getting this survey up and running involved experts in Canada, the United States and Mexico. In Toronto, the project specifications were designed by McDougall Scientific Ltd., the data management firm in charge of the survey. McDougall Scientific partnered with Telanet Canada Inc. to launch a project-specific IVR system, one of the first of its breed in Canada. The programming was outsourced to a division of Nortel Networks Ltd., based in Bohemia, N.Y., in conjunction with Nortel developers in Mexico City.

Before launching the survey, Maclean's commissioned an independent ethical review of the project. This was handled by the ethics review committee of ethica Clinical Research Inc. of Montreal. The committee gave the survey its unconditional approval.

SURVEY CONSULTANTS: Angus Reid (Angus Reid Consultants); Shahrokh Khorram (Nordic Research Group)

TECHNICAL TEAM: Janet McDougall, Hong Chen, Drew Finnie (McDougall Scientific Ltd.); Dan Silverman (Telanet Canada Inc.)

Assessing the Classroom and Beyond

Grads of many small Primarily Undergraduate universities were particularly satisfied when grading teaching and instruction at their alma mater. In fact, 10 of the institutions in the top 15 spots have a full-time student population of 5,000 or less. Similarly, graduates from universities in that category were also among the most enthusiastic when assessing the total learning environment.

TEACHING AND INSTRUCTION

TOP HALF VERY GOOD (PER CENT)

Mount Allison 86

Cape Breton (UCCB) 82

St. Francis Xavier 80

Nipissing 78

Bishop's 76

Winnipeg 74

St. Thomas 73

Acadia 71

UPEI 69

Trent 69

Guelph 66

Mount Saint Vincent 66

Saint Mary's 66

Western 66

Brock 65

Queen's 61

Wilfrid Laurier 61

Lethbridge 60

Waterloo 59

Saskatchewan 58

McMaster 57

Sherbrooke 57

Victoria 57

PRIMARILY UNDERGRADUATE

Mount Allison 86

Cape Breton (UCCB) 82

St. Francis Xavier 80

Nipissing 78

Bishop's 76

COMPREHENSIVE

Guelph 66

Waterloo 59

Victoria 57

Memorial 53

Carleton 51

Simon Fraser 51

MEDICAL DOCTORAL

Western 66

Queen's 61

Saskatchewan 58

McMaster 57

Sherbrooke 57

THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

TOP HALF VERY GOOD (PER CENT)

Mount Allison 84

Acadia 79

St. Thomas 77

Bishop's 75

Nipissing 72

St. Francis Xavier 71

Cape Breton (UCCB) 68

Trent 68

UNBC 67

Western 67

Sherbrooke 65

Guelph 64

Winnipeg 64

Queen's 63

Brock 62

Saint Mary's 62

UPEI 61

Waterloo 61

Lethbridge 59

Wilfrid Laurier 59

Saskatchewan 58

McMaster 53

Victoria 53

PRIMARILY UNDERGRADUATE

Mount Allison 84

Acadia 79

St. Thomas 77

Bishop's 75

Nipissing 72

COMPREHENSIVE

Guelph 64

Waterloo 61

Victoria 53

New Brunswick 51

Memorial 47

MEDICAL DOCTORAL

Western 67

Sherbrooke 65

Queen's 63

Saskatchewan 58

McMaster 53

READING THE CHARTS

Unless otherwise stated, the figures displayed represent the percentage of participants who responded "very good" or "definitely yes" to the questions on the survey. In the majority of charts, universities with the highest percentages are displayed as one of the top five in their category, and/or in the top half overall, irrespective of category. In cases where universities have the identical percentages, the lists may be extended. In the charts where universities are listed within their categories, as many as seven may be named. In the Top Half charts, the lists may break in such a way that as many as 25 universities will be displayed.

A Perspective on the Broader Campus Experience

When it came to grading student services and the extracurricular environment, the grads sent a tough message: overall, only 35 and 38 per cent respectively gave their alma mater top marks. Still, certain universities distinguished themselves, and not just the Primarily Undergraduate schools. Western, Guelph, Queen's and Sherbrooke were among those that left a relatively positive impression.

STUDENT SERVICES

TOP HALF VERY GOOD (PER CENT)

PRIMARILY UNDERGRADUATE

Nipissing 58

St. Francis Xavier 57

Bishop's 56

St. Thomas 54

Mount Allison 50

COMPREHENSIVE

Guelph 51

Waterloo 40

Carleton 38

New Brunswick 36

Victoria 36

MEDICAL DOCTORAL

Western 56

Queen's 47

Sherbrooke 47

Saskatchewan 43

Alberta 41

EXTRACURRICULAR ENVIRONMENT

TOP HALF VERY GOOD (PER CENT)

Mount Allison 72

Bishop's 71

Western 66

Queen's 60

Guelph 59

Acadia 58

St. Francis Xavier 58

Saint Mary's 55

Sherbrooke 55

Saskatchewan 54

Wilfrid Laurier 52

McGill 48

Brock 47

St. Thomas 44

Trent 43

Alberta 42

Lakehead 42

Laval 42

McMaster 42

Moncton 41

Victoria 41

Nipissing 40

UBC 38

PRIMARILY UNDERGRADUATE

Mount Allison 72

Bishop's 71

Acadia 58

St. Francis Xavier 58

Saint Mary's 55

COMPREHENSIVE

Guelph 59

Victoria 41

Waterloo 37

New Bruswick 34

Carleton 30

MEDICAL DOCTORAL

Western 66

Queen's 60

Sherbrooke 55

Saskatchewan 54

McGill 48

Taking Stock

Not surprisingly, universities with the richest library collections fared well when rated by their graduates, particularly in the Medical Doctoral category.

LIBRARY RESOURCES

TOP HALF VERY GOOD (PER CENT)

Toronto 70

Memorial 68

Alberta 65

UBC 59

Western 59

Queen's 55

Saskatchewan 50

Ottawa 48

Concordia 46

Guelph 46

Montréal 46

Dalhousie 45

McMaster 45

Brandon 43

Waterloo 43

Calgary 41

Moncton 41

St. Francis Xavier 41

Manitoba 40

Carleton 39

New Brunswick 39

Laval 37

McGill 33

St. Thomas 33

Sherbrooke 33

PRIMARILY UNDERGRADUATE

Brandon 43

Moncton 41

St. Francis Xavier 41

St. Thomas 33

Cape Breton (UCCB) 32

Laurentian 32

COMPREHENSIVE

Memorial 68

Concordia 46

Guelph 46

Waterloo 43

Carleton 39

New Brunswick 39

MEDICAL DOCTORAL

Toronto 70

Alberta 65

UBC 59

Western 59

Queen's 55

Degrees of Satisfaction

•Were graduates from one field of study markedly more enthusiastic than those from another? Below are the results: percentage of graduates from all universities, by program area, who responded "definitely yes" to the final two survey questions.

▪Would you recommend your university to a friend or relative interested in a similar course of studies?

Thinking back on your university experience, was it of significant benefit to your life today?

(ALL FIGURES SHOWN AS PERCENTAGES)

• ▪

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 62 76

Arts and Science 67 75

Education, Physical Education, Recreation and Leisure 68 77

Engineering and Applied Sciences 63 78

Fine and Applied Arts 54 69

Health Professions and Occupations 68 84

Humanities and Related 69 76

Mathematics and Physical Sciences 61 79

Social Sciences and Related 68 76

Resounding Endorsements

These two questions received the highest percentage of the top response. It's important to note that the first asked graduates whether they would recommend their alma mater to a friend or relative interested in a similar course of studies. The second was a more personal question, asking the grad to reflect on the benefit that their university experience has to their life today.

RECOMMEND TO A FRIEND OR RELATIVE

TOP HALF VERY GOOD (PER CENT)

Nipissing 91

St. Thomas 87

Sherbrooke 87

St. Francis Xavier 85

Bishop's 84

Winnipeg 84

Mount Allison 83

Waterloo 83

Guelph 82

Cape Breton (UCCB) 81

Brock 79

Western 79

Trent 78

Wilfrid Laurier 78

Acadia 77

UPEI 76

McMaster 75

Queen's 75

Lethbridge 74

Saint Mary's 74

Saskatchewan 72

McGill 71

Lakehead 70

PRIMARILY UNDERGRADUATE

Nipissing 91

St. Thomas 87

St. Francis Xavier 85

Bishop's 84

Winnipeg 84

COMPREHENSIVE

Waterloo 83

Guelph 82

Victoria 68

Concordia 66

New Brunswick 66

MEDICAL DOCTORAL

Sherbrooke 87

Western 79

McMaster 75

Queen's 75

Saskatchewan 72

SIGNIFICANT BENEFIT

TOP HALF VERY GOOD (PER CENT)

Western 89

Nipissing 88

Mount Allison 87

St. Francis Xavier 87

Sherbrooke 87

St. Thomas 86

Saskatchewan 85

Acadia 84

Bishop's 84

Trent 84

Guelph 83

Lakehead 83

McMaster 83

UPEI 83

Waterloo 83

Queen's 82

Victoria 82

Brock 81

McGill 80

Wilfrid Laurier 80

Alberta 78

Dalhousie 78

New Brunswick 78

UNBC 78

Winnipeg 78

PRIMARILY UNDERGRADUATE

Nipissing 88

Mount Allison 87

St. Francis Xavier 87

St. Thomas 86

Acadia 84

Bishop's 84

Trent 84

COMPREHENSIVE

Guelph 83

Waterloo 83

Victoria 82

New Brunswick 78

Carleton 77

MEDICAL DOCTORAL

Western 89

Sherbrooke 87

Saskatchewan 85

McMaster 83

Queen's 82

Rating the Entire Educational Experience

The universities below are listed in descending order, according to the percentage of participants who responded "very good." To provide an overall picture of satisfaction, the percentage of "good" responses is included as well. It is worth noting that when combined, all universities achieved 90 per cent or more.

VERY GOOD (PER CENT) GOOD (PER CENT)

Mount Allison 88 8

Nipissing 84 14

St. Francis Xavier 84 14

Acadia 82 16

Bishop's 81 18

Sherbrooke 81 18

Cape Breton (UCCB) 79 21

Western 77 20

St. Thomas 76 23

Winnipeg 76 21

Guelph 75 22

Saint Mary's 73 23

Queen's 72 25

Trent 72 26

Brock 71 27

UPEI 71 27

Waterloo 71 26

Lethbridge 70 27

Wilfrid Laurier 70 28

McMaster 69 28

Saskatchewan 69 28

Lakehead 66 31

Victoria 65 32

UNBC 64 35

McGill 63 35

New Brunswick 62 35

Mount Saint Vincent 61 35

Alberta 59 36

Brandon 59 36

Laval 58 38

Dalhousie 56 35

Memorial 56 37

Carleton 55 41

Laurentian 55 38

Manitoba 55 38

Ryerson 55 38

Windsor 55 38

Concordia 53 40

Simon Fraser 53 41

Ottawa 51 43

Regina 50 41

Moncton 49 46

Toronto 47 43

UBC 46 44

Montréal 45 49

Calgary 43 49

Graduate Satisfaction

The Maclean's University Graduate Survey represents an enormous co-operative effort on the part of 46 universities, all of which contacted graduates from the years 1999, 2000 and 2001, inviting them to take part. In total, 12,334 grads participated: 10,884 in English and 1,450 in French. All of the institutions are listed alphabetically in the chart below. The figures represent the percentage of graduates who responded "very good" or "definitely yes" - the highest levels of satisfaction - to seven of the eight survey questions.

(ALL FIGURES SHOWN AS PERCENTAGES)

1. Teaching and Instruction, 2. Learning Environment, 3. Library Resources, 4. Student Services, 5. Extracurricular, 6. Recommend to a Friend, 7. Significant Benefit

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Acadia 71 79 23 49 58 77 84

Alberta 51 52 65 41 42 60 78

Bishop's 76 75 19 56 71 84 84

Brandon 49 51 43 37 15 59 76

UBC 36 35 59 27 38 55 72

Brock 65 62 22 37 47 79 81

Calgary 39 43 41 27 23 49 75

Cape Breton (UCCB) 82 68 32 40 31 81 74

Carleton 51 43 39 38 30 63 77

Concordia 50 39 46 30 24 66 69

Dalhousie 51 45 45 29 33 62 78

Guelph 66 64 46 51 59 82 83

Lakehead 50 47 28 43 42 70 83

Laurentian 47 45 32 30 28 63 73

Laval 44 44 37 38 42 62 73

Lethbridge 60 59 14 38 33 74 76

Manitoba 48 40 40 35 28 58 77

McGill 54 48 33 32 48 71 80

McMaster 57 53 45 30 42 75 83

Memorial 53 47 68 35 18 62 76

Moncton 32 47 41 39 41 52 65

Montréal 39 35 46 22 31 57 65

Mount Allison 86 84 24 50 72 83 87

Mount Saint Vincent 66 51 22 25 11 69 76

New Brunswick 48 51 39 36 34 66 78

Nipissing 78 72 19 58 40 91 88

UNBC 53 67 17 29 17 69 78

Ottawa 49 41 48 28 29 60 70

UPEI 69 61 20 33 30 76 83

Queen's 61 63 55 47 60 75 82

Regina 36 42 28 27 23 56 75

Ryerson 43 40 11 27 21 63 76

St. Francis Xavier 80 71 41 57 58 85 87

Saint Mary's 66 62 21 49 55 74 74

St. Thomas 73 77 33 54 44 87 86

Saskatchewan 58 58 50 43 54 72 85

Sherbrooke 57 65 33 47 55 87 87

Simon Fraser 51 40 32 25 16 65 76

Toronto 50 42 70 25 24 53 70

Trent 69 68 14 40 43 78 84

Victoria 57 53 32 36 41 68 82

Waterloo 59 61 43 40 37 83 83

Western 66 67 59 56 66 79 89

Wilfrid Laurier 61 59 14 42 52 78 80

Windsor 43 37 28 33 26 62 74

Winnipeg 74 64 23 31 22 84 78

Maclean's November 15, 2004