I agree ( I personally graduated from UBC ) best employees I have every hired came out of Waterloo. Graduated with transferable skills, decent experience and technically aware. As an employer it's basic expectation but shockingly many I have interviewed over the years don't graduate with a good skill set, maybe after a few years of work experience and good project experience graduates can develop those necessary skills but all the grads I interviewed and hired graduated with that skill set right out of school.

You have to be kidding right? Most don't stay in Ottawa because most Carleton undergrad students are not local... it is NOT because they are getting poached by top schools. In fact, they have had a terrible time keeping steady quality faculty and directorship for about 10 years.

It is true that Carleton in its prime was a great art school and known as a feeder but that is certainly not the case today since they split the program into 3.

Waterloo is the most difficult and best architecture school in canada and will not only set up any applicant for a successful entry into the workplace, but will hold value come time for M.arch applications.  If you knew anything about the vast differences between the schools, you'd know.

My source, I have arch degrees from both of these schools and still keep in-touch with faculty and students in each.

Splitting the program into 3 is specifically to give undergraduates the option to specialize according to the area of work or graduate study they want to pursue afterwards. The Design stream is still specifically for the pursuit M.Arch, C&S for students looking to do Heritage/Preservation/Conservation, and Urbanism for students wanting to do MUP, or MUD.

If you have attended reviews, received degrees, or taught outside of Canada you would know that globally the schools of architecture operate in cliques and that their groupings are based on their most recent reputation along with the faculty currently teaching.

I hope you enjoyed the koolaid.

I throughly enjoyed the Carleton plug above. It’s like some sort of bad sci-fi movie where the cgi is still mostly painted models on strings but with extra zoom zoom sounds.

Cambridge is a hole, always has been... Galt specifically. There are some very affluent areas and tonnes of shitty subdivisions just outside of Galt but they mostly serve as sleeping communities for the GTA. 

Cambridge was at one time a textile place, then had some big auto plant, I think... but besides that, there is very little commercial activity. The reason why the school is there is because the building was empty and Mr. Blackberry made a big donation to the university. But you don't pick undergrad schools because of location. You pick them because of the education, which, despite it's location, is un-matched in Waterloo. Also note that you won't have much time to shop and drink at bars in architecture school so it's all rather moot anyways. 

You assumptions are incorrect. I loved my time at Carleton and developed a great artistic approach to design. This was well over 15y ago when the school was smaller and prior to them splitting the undergrad into 3 paths. The issue is, the school went through a very long period of time without a director and failed to retain/attract faculty and focus was removed from the BAS and placed into the CIMS and PhD programs. The love for traditional graphic arts and crafting discipline is gone... and is now replaced with a much weaker studio population. 

So, if you have the smarts and an artistic flair, you're best to shoot for the best program available (and 2nd, let's not forget McGill). But unless you're getting into either of these schools, making the move out to eastern Ontario from Alberta is not worth the cost for an average BAS. Carleton, like most canadian schools are truly representation of the "you get what you put in". This means that although you may graduate with top dog honours with extra unicorn sprinkles...you'll also be standing next to a bunch of "65% is all I need to pass" wankers. It is not a difficult school to get in and it is not difficult to pass (more evident in the non design-paths). Your degree is only as good as the lowest grade the pass.

This lax attitude was not present back when I attended. So yes, you can build a good enough folio of work to move on to top schools (this is possible at any of the schools) but the opportunities and challenges are not the same where the bar for entry is greater.  Back to the "get what you put in" comment, you need to really know what you're getting into.

Not sure how you got "tech guy" tho... My Carleton folio was 80% paintings.  

funny, I actually gave many of those entrance interviews (and even toured the school with the parents) and I can tell you for a bonafide fact that there are no coin toss. Every applicant (all 80ish or so) are very well chosen with faculty and graduate students often arguing in favor (or not) for certain students. Not sure why you would imply I use ad hominem attacks, I've seen the academic side and the results in the workplace and can very much defend my opinion on these matters. Care to enlighten me on where I've been wrong?