U of T and U of C are quite different.  

For U of T, you could easily draw on the Greater Toronto Area to experiment different ideas.  The U of T faculty has strong ties to the US as many of them are graduates of Harvard and other ivy league schools.  They often bring in faculty members of those schools as guest critics.  The faculty also has an excellent lecture series with interesting speakers from all over the world.  U of T's studio has a balance of topics from digital fabrication to building typologies and urban design.  During third year, you have the option to take studios of the MLA or MUD programs.  U of T's architecture building is old and not a very comfortable place to be.  However, all the resources you need (an excellent in-house architecture library, CNC, laser cutters, 3D printers, large-format plotting, etc.) are within the building.  They tend to invest a lot on IT to make sure that all the computers, printers and plotters are running properly.  To learn more about the course and studio contents, visit the faculty website.

U of C, on the other hand, is good if you're interested in building in the rockies.  The faculty always has a strong focus on environmental design.  The building is more pleasant than U of T's.  The studio spaces at the U of C surround an atrium.  So, students are always aware of what's going on in the faculty - whether there is an on-going review or party.  The downside is there isn't an in-house architecture library like U of T.  However, the university's main library is nearby and can be accessed through tunnels (without the need to head outside).  U of C has a better and larger workshop than U of T.  U of C is smaller and more intimate.  The faculty and student population may not be as diverse as U of T.  Many of the faculty members (regular and sessional) are graduates of their own school.  Most students are from the Prairies (with a few from BC).  If you're interested in practising outside Alberta, you may not see a lot of people from the U of C.  

Don't really know too much about U of C but started at U of T last fall.  architecte was right in what he said, I'll just add a few more info.

Starting last year, U of T started teaching any Visual Communication classes in a 2 week workshop format where during those two weeks (while newbies are learning software) you don't have studio, but still have the other courses.  They're taught in one week blocks, one at the beginning of semester and the other midway through the semester.  After that week, you no longer have to take any viscom class, effectively only having studio, theory, and something technical the rest of semester.  I think it's a great way of teaching software especially for beginners.  Don't have to worry as much about learning software and assignment for that course (Viscom) as you're trying to come up with design for studio.  We learned video/animation (After Effects, Premier) and parametric modelling on our last viscom first year 

They've also started to make a great effort in trying to co-ordinate deadlines so not more than one thing would be due for that week.  Professors co-ordinate with each other on when things are due.  Which is another humane way of doing things, not really implemented anywhere else I think.  could be wrong though.  

The vibe in my year has been pretty positive from the people.  There's 71-75 students though, so it's a little less personal, can easily get lost in the crowd. The age range I'd say average for my year was around 25, with a few in late 20's early 30's and one or two much older.  The professors try to instil a sense of competition, but in our year there was great camaraderie, everyone's been pretty supportive of each other.

We have a sweet cafe with cheap coffee and pastries, as well as a lounge/game room with couches (for all nighters).   That's the one place you're not allowed to work.  The library is pretty sweet, has a Frank Lloyd Wright Chair in it.  Nicely designed space.  

There's been talk of moving since a person in my year was in undergrad at this school. I think they're saying in the next 3 years or something we have to move out of the building.  Don't really know what's going on with that, but i think the Undergraduate House has dibs on the building after our lease is up.  We're there for the next few years though and will be moving apparently during my thesis year.  But don't go by what I'm saying.  Hard to separate rumour from fact when it comes to that.  

I forgot, as far as focus goes, I think U of T is heavy on the theory, graphics and the digital side.  not so much design/build.

Hi Choresi,

I can't believe I just found this post recent right now. I'm just curious, were there any M.Arch students that were in your program who studied architecture at Ryerson for their undergrad? As well, how did they find it? Did they enjoy it? Did they struggle? 

Kinda curious because I am planning to pursue my Masters in the near future. (Unfortunately in Canada there is no B.Arch program). I've completed my undergraduate degree of architectural science at Ryerson, however I am open to other architecture school options. (I'm from the old curriculum of Ryerson's architectural science...I kinda wanna balance it off with some theory...I ask M.Arch advice from my professors and somehow the conversation turns out advocating for Rye! Rye! Rye! -_-;...Kinda want an unbiased opinion)

lol...Forum comment form is acting up. 

Hmm...I don't think so, none that I can recall at the moment.  There were arch undergrads from all over, UBC, U of C, Manitoba, MIT, U of T, Colorado, but I don't recall Ryerson.  Could be mistaken though. 

We actually had the new dean of arch from Ryerson come speak to us. 
He asked how many of us had an undergrad in architecture then went on to mention they shouldn't be here since this school curriculum was more geared for people with other undergrads.

And some were frustrated a little for not being able to skip a year and be in advanced placement, having to go over remedial things yet again.  It'll certainly be different from your very technical background though.  So you might feel less frustrated than others who went to a more design oriented undergrad degree.  There is the extra year to consider, if it's worth it or not. 

The work that comes out of the school have generally been pretty impressive though winning competitions and such.  Which I think can be attributed to their emphasis on theory and graphics giving more background meat to design ideas and expression of those ideas.  I don't know if that's helpful or not. 

want to be a monkey CADing away in the corner, go to Ryerson.  Want to be Gehry, go to U of T.  :P

Is an MArch from U of T (or any Canadian university) equivalent to one in the US in terms of professional licensure? Specifically, could one be licensed/registered with NCARB/state registation boards with a MArch from U of T?

Yup. And Canadian and American professionally accredited M.Archs are structured the same way.  

Yes, the M.Arch should be good in the US since I believe that the CACB is similar to NAAB in the states, and UofT and Ryerson should be part of the ACSA.

However there is a problem if it comes to the procedure to getting licensed in Ontario through the (Ontario Architectural Association`s (OAA's) new program for licensure. It's starting to change which might make it a little difficult to practice architecture in the States. I got this from approaching the IDP representatives at an AIAS conference, they told me this is the problem if I become an Licensed Architect in Ontario with their IDP equivalent as there will be changes to the internship hours and the structure of the licensing exams that will vary from the American IDP program...however there`s the ARE`s which are different? - does anyone know anything about this more?

See, this is the problem if you're a Canadian architecture student that is a member of the AIAS - You tend to not focus on the American side of licensure since it doesn't apply to you during conferences...however in Canada there isn't enough architecture student groups informing students about becoming a licensed architect in Canada...esp undergrads about the path to becoming licensed (There are no accredited B.Arch degree programs in Canada, everyone has to aim for a M.Arch)

(I must say, my chapter of the AIAS started this year to have an OAA licensure seminar...but it was on a snowy day and most of our speakers were unable to attend...at least we tried, but we were told the OAA is undergoing some changes to the exams and amount of internship hours from one of the speakers)

i heard that daniels IS moving building this september....

accesskb,
I find your statement quite ignorant. If you have looked at the work being produced at each school and at several of the cultural events that are going on in the city I think you would quickly realize that Ryerson is on par with, if not better than, most of the schools of architecture in Canada (including UofT).

Also if I'm not mistaken Gehry went to the University of Southern California
 

We've had graduates from Ryerson's interior design program go to UofT every year for the past few years. I also spoke to a UofT grad student a while ago and he mentioned that there was usually a handful from Ryerson architectural science each year. 

does anyone know when U of T send the final decisions for Master of Architecture ?

They have said generally in March but I haven't heard yet!