Poor Syllabus path down at the bottom. If a person manages to finish this path they deserve more respect than the bottom of the list, certainly above UofT. They are probably have more self discipline than any of the graduates from the top university.

Agree... I only know of a few in my local arch circles who've actually passed it (RAIC). Those folks are super organized and very buisness-oriented. Everyone else I've crossed is a weird "artist" dreamer, a disgruntled but lazy tech, or a quarter-time student who believes that 10years of self-guided study is a good use of their free time.

As I drag my butt through year 6 of Syllabus there are many things I can think of that I would much rather be doing than writing a long research essay about how architecture was used to promote and sustain states that were structured along hereditary class lines.

Search the forums but the 30second spiel is that a vast majority of its M.arch class is composed of students from its bad "architectural studies" bachelor program so that waters down the average student quality. Another is simply because it's toronto. Sure, UofT has a good rep for many programs, but just because it has a good school of business, or medicine, or law, etc... does not automatically mean its arch school is good. Finally, UofT is for most a default school "just to get the degree because my parents live in the GTA" so complaceteness and half-ass'ness runs strong through student body and graduate works. Some exceptions apply, obviously, but in general, this is why I see it at the bottom.