if it’s any consolation, I’ve never heard of this school. Also important, rankings are bullshit anyways.  

I don't think this student has had the chance of attending any of these other high caliber schools they mention. Or they would have known that theory, construction and sustainable design are treated very similarly across the board in Architecture schools. While I understand where some of these frustrations come from, I don't think that such a wide generalization is fair to a number of the MSA staff who do really amazing work and dedicate their life to teaching at this school. This is coming from someone who's studied and taught across 6 medium to high ranking Universities across Europe and the US. 

I'd like to see more statistics and information (Employment data, graduate income, student/faculty work, assignment briefs, etc) from the OP to bolster his/her case. This would help elevate the complaint beyond the anecdotal. The proliferation of for-profit education - inflated by huge numbers of international students - has indeed led to a rash of sub-par schooling in 'soft' subjects. Rubbish ranking systems only helps to hoodwink misinformed students and parents.

Now whether or not there is deceit and malice in their marketing is a trickier question. The Art Institute, a chain of art schools in the US, was recently sued by students and alumni after it went bust - partly for fraud. The OP can look up that lawsuit to see how the case was built by the plaintiffs.

I'm of the view that the fancy theory stuff is best left to those brand name schools which can afford to waste time on academic shannanigans thanks to their alumni recruitment and reputation. Otherwise schools are best advised to teach building science and construction techniques first before allowing students to run amok with the weird and wonderful.

I cannot agree more. I graduated a couple years ago and the tutors are appalling. This has nothing to do with how good the students are - I know because some lucky ones such as myself and others have managed to go on to better schools in Europe (Bartlett/AA/Delft) but it was no thanks to MSA. Job hunting was so tough after graduating from MSA and that one person in my cohort worked in a fast-food joint for a while before settling for a mid-sized soulless firm in a small town.

FYI the saturation of architecture graduates in the UK is so high that people at much better schools also struggle but Manchester graduates' outputs across the board are NOWHERE good enough to compete with others - on EITHER the theoretical realm or the technical (I learned more reading a recommended First Year technical book on the reading list of a good uni than my entire 3 years at Manchester lol). For what it's worth when it comes to getting jobs in the UK it is by far much better to go to a top school (even if it's #TheoryOverTechnicality) than it is to go to a "technically inclined" school.

The fact that the UK government has engineered their educational institutions to become a business model means that past students who have spent so much money on it should be allowed to review their protocols and practices, just like any other consumer. People who didn't go to this school shouldn't bother with saying anything. This is clearly a disclaimer for prospective students and they deserve to know (I know I would have chosen otherwise if I was made aware of how sh*t they would be). And if they were any good there would a queue of ex-students defending them.

Good on you OP for sharing.

Having read this post about MSA, along with several other similar ex-student reviews about the university, I can confirm that they are all true. I was naive to disregard them before starting my MArch at MSA this September, but unfortunately the quality of education and course structure is nowhere near top 10 in the world. The course is entirely run by MMU with almost no input from UoM, which is incredibly misleading to prospective students who are tricked into believing that they will receive teaching from a highly-ranked Russell Group university. The module description isn’t clear on the website, in terms of explaining what you’ll be taught and how you’re assessed. They are in fact a mashup of the assessment requirements which RIBA sets out for Part 2 affiliation within their ‘ateliers’, which differs greatly from a typical university module selection. The majority of assessment marks are from group work projects with the dissertation the only individually assessed module. After studying for 6 weeks at MSA, I had enough of the course, knowing what was to come for the rest of the MArch. They couldn’t care less when I asked to leave the university and never asked for my reasoning. Thankfully I got a last-minute transfer to the university where I completed my undergraduate degree. AVOID MSA!

Name a school today anywhere in the World for any profession that is not "profit-driven organisation".

Their aim is to sign up as many students as they can get a hold of. Profit is No. 1 word in schools. To think any other way is gross naivety.

Pretty rich to generalise all international students as people without command of the english language and lacking academic skills. I think all that's happened here is you were exposed to an environment you weren't used it. 

on the off chance that it's any reassurance, I've never known about this school. Additionally significant, rankings are horse crap in any case.

I thought this was about Sciarc LOL

Take it from me, and my practical experience in life!  I have a 4-year Bachelors Degree from FIU, in Architecture, and 10 years of building construction experience. I worked with tools and my hands (hands-on) from the foundation up to the roof for my stepfather's construction business. 

Also, I have 10 years as an Autocad draftsman for Architects.  I lost my desire to become an Architect with my past experiences working for them.

Architecture is a slippery slope, and will only lead you to no-where.  Take either "Healthcare or Technologies", this is where a good-paying stable job is at.  I don't know how Architecture is still apart of the curriculum in colleges since it isn't a good paying and stable profession any longer.

Most Architects do not want to build something for themselves, most cannot even swing a hammer, and will try to get you to do it for them.

The reason why I got into Architecture was to improve my life, and I liked to draw and be creative with design, and even get back to building something from time to time.  After college, I never was able to design again, I only worked for 10 years on AutoCAD with working drawings, and that's what most 90% of you will be doing after graduating. 

Most Architects don't even know how to build anything for themselves, or even take interest in you, and can only do what the owners will ask them to do.  If you have a better idea as an Architect, and the owner has another, then what?  Don't forget the confusing building department, which is absurd being that you have to know what they want (creativity?) as well.

Optimistically, I'm not knocking all Architects, and hopefully, there might be about 10% left.  Although, these are the ones I never worked with, and employment has always been, and is still very hard to find!

Most of these Architects will use naive people/kids straight out of college to complete their work (most cannot operate AutoCAD) for them for only one year, and thinking nothing at all about their futures. 

Why aren't there "Unions" to protect us workers from these predatorial Architectural practices?

I hope I can help at least one person with this, and good luck with your future!

Hello, I received offers from Cardiff, Newcastle and Manchester. Which one would you recommend selecting for a firm choice for an undergraduate programme?  Now, after reading your review on MSA I'm very nervous and unsure about it.

Yes, we definitely need "unions" to control these deceitful employers, and business people, from taking advantage of the middle class hard working people!

The U.S. Department of State has strongly issued the highest level: 

DO NOT TRAVEL ADVISORY to the United Kingdom.

April 20, 2021

United Kingdom - Level 4: Do Not Travel

Do not travel to the United Kingdom due to COVID-19. Exercise increased caution due to terrorism.

Read the Department of State’s COVID-19 page before you plan any international travel.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has issued a Level 4 Travel Health Notice for the United Kingdom due to COVID-19, indicating a very high level of COVID-19 in the country. There are restrictions in place affecting U.S. citizen entry into the United Kingdom. Visit the Embassy's COVID-19 page for more information on COVID-19 in the United Kingdom.

Terrorist groups continue plotting possible attacks in the United Kingdom. Terrorists may attack with little or no warning, targeting tourist locations, transportation hubs, markets/shopping malls, local government facilities, hotels, clubs, restaurants, places of worship, parks, major sporting and cultural events, educational institutions, airports, and other public areas.

There is also a risk of isolated violence by dissident groups in Northern Ireland, focused primarily on police and military targets.

Interesting read. I am an alumni from MSA, but I studied there over 6 years ago before we all started seeing them in global ranks. I wouldn't call it a scam, because plenty of graduates from MSA have become practicing architects.

I wouldn't know how to compare it to other universities since I didn't study at any others, but I would point out some thoughts: 

- Some tutors are practicing architects/registered architects and I would recommend the studios these tutors lead. There are the odd few studios that churn out good graduates. Unfortunately I regret the studios I chose.

- Some studios are definitely better taught than others. But you will find that a lot is self taught work and self developed. Some tutors just give very subjective unuseful comments, some more practical and insightful. The hard work done is really by the students themselves.

- Their 6th Year Professional Studies module I found very good as the lectures were taught by some examiners/registered architects and was a good basic fundamental module to introducing Part 3 examination topics. Technical lecture in undergraduate are so so, often overlooked but important knowledge for later on in life.

- Back when I graduated, it was difficult to find a job. It took a number of months to land on one. But that year, the employment rate for MSA graduates was pretty high. 

- Their ranking may have been based full on the research department which sits under UofM. Those researchers do very well and have been key to improving building regulations guidance over the years. And a number of them become your supervisor for your dissertation.

- Yes there are a lot of international students. Most universities welcome internationals. International fees are what cover tutor/lecturer fees and running/improvement of the buildings. That's the only way? 

The UCL Bartlett School of Architecture and Environment: a deceitful, profit-driven organisation.

I STRONGLY DO NOT RECOMMEND attending the UCL Bartlett School of Architecture and School of Environment, Energy & Resources Environmental Design and Engineering. 

Beware of misleading and the lack of information disclosure on UCL’s website subject to false advertisement. UCL is being run as a business, not as a university. UCL does not answer any graduate phone calls. It is a business scam and a typical UK university degree mill churning out as many students as possible in a desperate attempt for financial gain. The programme was so bad that several people dropped out. Avoid being misled and making a big mistake. Do not waste money and go through the hassle of applying for a UK student visa and be treated like a “criminal”. 

Over the number of years, the programme doubled and tripled the number of international students to increase revenue because they pay significantly higher fees. There were approximately 70-75 students in the programme that consisted of 85-90% international students in the age range 20-24. Out of this percentage, 70-75% were students all from China, 10-15% EU, 3% UK. English was not the primary language spoken among students. The university even stopped publishing previous class photos and students’ names and dissertations on the programme’s website. 

The programme supervisor had announced to the whole cohort that they had “over-recruited” students; the number of admitted students was based on how many people could fit into the lecture halls. The university desperately recruited and crammed as many students as possible into the programme for financial gain. Many lectures were joined by other students from other programmes because of cost effective reasons to hire less lecturers. Even some classes were not taught by a live instructor, but offered through pre-recorded videos. Coursework was extremely convoluted and marking schemes were ridiculously subjective. Don’t expect help from instructors or tutors because they are not willing since it’s considered a form of favourable bias. Expect independent study to figure everything out on your own. 

The director/lecturer was an alumnus of the program, but clearly unprofessionally and unqualified to lead and manage the program. The director was neither licensed as an architect or engineer, but a “building scientist”, in other words only qualified as an academic researcher. The director was a very awkward, creepy, obsequious, armchair theorist with only 1-2 years of entry level professional working experience who made many questionable decisions and even didn’t know how to answer questions due to a lack of knowledge and experience. The director even admitted that he didn’t know what he was doing and constantly harassed students for feedback to help him run the programme. The university had hired an incompetent and inexperienced babysitter simply because he was cheap labor. 

Existing facilities were inadequate, in poor condition, and jam packed with students. Schedules were unorganized and students had to travel different locations throughout the campus for every module. The programme did not have a physical location because of the rapid expansion of new programmes and the high cost of building new facilities. The university even had to rent facilities from the adjacent hotel and distant buildings to accommodate the growing large number of international students. 

I strongly DO NOT RECOMMEND attending the UCL Bartlett School of Architecture and School of Environment, Energy & Resources Environmental Design and Engineering: a deceitful, profit-driven organisation.

Nope. Just another unsatisfied customer writing a honest negative review as warning to help people. 

EX-STUDENTS COMPLAIN OF SEXISM AND RACISM AT UCL ARCHITECTURE SCHOOL

Exclusive: allegations going back a decade include inappropriate comments on appearance and race

A dossier shared with the Guardian claimed there were ‘systemic’ problems at the Bartlett school of architecture. 

Former students have complained of sexism and racism at University College London’s leading architecture school going back a decade, alleging inappropriate comments were made about appearance and race and female students were sometimes brought to tears.

In a dossier shared with the Guardian, compiled by a former student, Eleni Kyriacou, and including testimonials from 21 people, they claimed there were “systemic” problems at the Bartlett, the academic centre for the study of the built environment at UCL.

The university said it had been “aware of issues” in the Bartlett school and was working to address them. It is launching an investigation into the student complaints.

In 2007 an investigation by the equality, diversity and inclusion team at UCL, which monitors grades, picked up issues with women being given different marks than men. The team subsequently monitored teaching and concluded female students were being treated differently. The institution worked to address this, making improvements in recent years, but did not contact Bartlett alumni to inform them.

The Guardian spoke to a number of students who have graduated in the last couple of years, who all asked to remain anonymous. One former student, of south Asian descent claimed staff were “damaging primarily female students”.

She claimed a staff member had told a student he could not tell she was “brown”, as “‘she acted and spoke like a white person”. She felt her grades were affected by sexism and said: “I am still struggling with self-belief.”

One student claimed they made a serious complaint to Bartlett about a unit brief, which was published last year, that they had seen in text and video format. The video, which the student said caused hurt to many black and minority ethnic alumni, has since been removed by the university.

“The brief had created a connection between hesitancy in the use of colour in architecture and race and the Black Lives Matter movement. I found it absurd, ignorant, and offensive,” she said.

She said the video showed images of the Black Lives Matter movement. “So it used a lot of violent imagery and then with that, the voiceover was discussing chromophobia,” she said. Chromophobia is a persistent, irrational fear of, or aversion to, colours and is usually a conditioned response.

She said the video appeared to say that “if there are colourful buildings in the new world of joy then racism or sexism would be negated”.

She said it was “sloppy” and when she spoke to the director of the school he said he recognised the video as “awkward”, which was followed by its removal.

“I was shocked at the insensitivity and the violence of the images combined with the message of ‘chromophobia’. Having been a victim of racist teasing by my peers at the Bartlett, I felt very let down as the video and brief showed that there were tutors at the school who did not seem to understand the nuances of being black and an architectural student, and don’t seem to honestly address the idea that to some ignorant people being black, working-class, and an architect are all things that are not compatible.

“Students at the Bartlett, who came from all-boys public schools in London, called me the ‘whitest’ black person they had met. To them, studying architecture at a top school like UCL was a white and middle-class thing, not a place for a mixed-race, British, Black Caribbean woman with a working-class heritage.

“Rather than just take down that unit’s video and change the conflation of ‘chromophobia’ and the BLM movement in the unit’s brief, all unit intro videos were taken down and the brief was never changed.”

Students reported seeing other female students cry. Another claimed: “I agree that the Bartlett has a sexist culture.”

Kyriacou said she compiled the report after experiencing sexism while studying at the institution in 2000. She said: “I fear these findings implicate widespread misconduct that may have had a detrimental effect on hundreds of alumni, predominantly female.

“I urge UCL to investigate and to take bold action with regards to accountability for the misconduct that has occurred regarding staff members, but also to consider offering female alumni grade changes and being offered their RIBA part I [qualification] to those who need it so they can still become architects.”

Prof Sasha Roseneil, a pro-provost (equity and inclusion) at UCL, said: “We have been aware of issues in the Bartlett school of architecture and have been working hard to address them for some time. We are deeply concerned to learn about these incidents, and we will investigate these, and any others that are brought to our attention.”

In 2020, 40.5% of women at the Bartlett gained a first-class degree, compared with 39.5% of men. The Bartlett faculty of the built environment introduced a scholarship scheme last year to attract students from a broader range of backgrounds and to tackle the lack of diversity among the built environment professions.

Roseneil said: “We want to understand the wider and deeper issues raised by these reports, and so we will conduct a review into culture and behaviours in the school, as well as looking at the historical data.

“We are all too aware that sexist and racist behaviour takes place at UCL, and we are committed to tackling inequalities and to ensuring that our university is an environment in which students and staff can thrive in their diversity.”

I think the experience at MSA greatly depends with what the student makes of it, how much effort and initiative you're willing to take. I have been studying in this university for 5 years now and I would have to disagree with some of the points made in this post and in the comments. 

First of all, the teaching staff is nothing short of amazing and dedicated, I think it's greatly unfair to undermine their qualifications like you did. They have amazing projects and research papers that are quoted and analyzed by other scholars and architects. They also provide lots of attention to anyone who indicates that they need help. 

The grade boundary has not been lowered to be 68%-- not sure where this information is from, maybe it has been several years ago or something like that? But it definitely is not now. 

I don't think the MArch course brief has been difficult to understand at all - any questions are answered within a day by the course lead and tutors so there really are no issues in getting all the information you need. 

A comment also mentioned that majority of their MArch grades were based on group work - not entirely sure what kind of work that might've been as in my experience for almost all the projects students are free to choose whether to work individually or in groups and most end up working on one group project a year ( 1 out of 4 or 5 over the units). 

While the university definitely has its flaws (same as, I imagine, any other institution), I feel like this particular review might have to do with the individual outcomes that this person has received from their education. But just because some place has not been exactly what you expected it to be, does not mean that it is a bad university. Majority of the students from my BA course have found jobs within the year of their graduation (take into account that it was 2020, the year when job hunting was difficult for eveyone) - many in the uk, but some in other european countries, asia and some in north america. Hence, as I said, I think the experience and your outcome depends mostly on what you're willing to make of it.