I can vouch for a couple of these, based on having applied and/or inquired, a number of years ago, and I think it hasn't changed much for 3 year M.Arch.:

UVa was the toughest

15 spaces - 30 accepted - 260 applicants

UW

25 spaces - 35 to 40 accepted - 200 applicants

UMich

35 spaces - higher acceptance than the above two

Was not interested in the private schools, except Rice - 15 or 20 spaces - probably a hair easier than UVa, because people would rather be on the East Coast than in Houston.

Hope this helps ... some.

http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2009/04/22/few-accepted-to-architecture-school/

someone mentioned GSD is 15-20% ( i think prob the lower end becuz everyone applies there regardless lol)... which is consistent with 14% of Yale in 2009.  I think the % are getting lower because each year there are more applicants. MIT might have a lower % because its program is only 30 ppl, instead of the standard 60 students at other ivies. In terms of selectivity I think Princeton is the most selective/has the most rejections, because they are looking for a very particular "type" of student.  (Every yr im just left with the impression "who the heck got into princeton?" lol, namely scholars...).  Around 10% of admissions are international students (based on school wide data and actual count).

what about GSAPP? and GSAPP's MS.AAD?

M.Arch I acceptance rates

GSD: 20%, YSoA: 9%, GSAPP:N/A, UVA: 15%, UWash: 26%, UCLA:N/A, Berkley:26% , MIT:17%, Princeton:N/A, UTofA: 32%, UMich:65%, Rice:35%

The acceptance rate for M.Arch programs in some of the top colleges in U.S. is low, which simply  translate that it is not so easy to get a seat in any of the good universities in this country. Standards as well as eligibility criterion are really strict, which keeps the acceptance rate at a lower level. 

hey want to know that  whether  student with undergrad in architecture ,bs ,ba in architecture are also accepted to m arch 1 prog???,because as compared to people with no background in architecture ,they have some design exp and have more prob of getting accepted ??

I think that Michigan is closer to 49%. Not 65%......

I think that Michigan is closer to 49%. Not 65%......

For being such a great school, even 49% is kind of liberal.  I would think Berkeley's would be lower - when I was looking, 300 apps for 30 spots, with more offers given, but I don't think it was as high as 26%.

abhaykadam - to be honest, having a bs or ba in architecture doesn't make you more likely to be accepted to an march program over someone who doesn't..  I've see some amazing portfolios by students coming from another program who get accepted into GSD and other top school. What some of these schools look for are creative abilities, someone who can push the norms/boundaries in architecture  because it is obvious that one with a 4 year barch degree would certainly know more about drawing walls and plans than someone who doesn't have an arch degree.  Being able to draw walls, plans and sections doesn'st mean you're creative and can think out of the box, which is what some of these school seem to look at for candidates. :)

http://archinect.com/forum/thread/92122/grad-school-acceptance-rates

^^I used this thread last year when compiling my info for apps this year. I know it's from a few years back but it had a lot of helpful info and links. I don't think the percentages have changed that much.

FYI Michigan has their stats posted. For most years past it's been around 50%:
http://taubmancollege.umich.edu/architecture/programs/graduate/student_profile/

Somewhere I found that Berkeley was closer to 17%? Don't quote me on that though..

^ 17% supports a final class of 30 from about 300, so this makes sense.  I think they extended 45/300 back then, and that's 15%, so that's about right.  It's not a great 3 year program, though.  It's a good ENOUGH 2 year program for those who have a sturdy 4 year prior to it, and sturdy is the key word.

@observant

Please elaborate on your comment. What do you mean by "sturdy?"

And "good enough" for what exactly?

This pertains only to a M.Arch. 2 year:

If you have a good undergraduate foundation in construction, environmental technology, and structures, about 2, 2 and 3 courses, respectively, then go ahead and dig your teeth into Berkeley's 2 year program and focus on design, theory, and emerging concepts.

If you don't have that backbone, you really can't look to Berkeley for it.  It's simple to assess.  Look at your undergrad studies and count its course distribution.  Then look at Berkeley's sample schedule for your curriculum.  Also, look to see if anything you missed in technology is offered as elective seminars via the UCB course catalog.

For the M.Arch. 3 year, Berkeley's technical content was shockingly too low for my taste.  Everybody and their brother STILL wants to go to this program (great school and adjacent to a BART subway stop in the Bay Area), so I wouldn't have gotten in, nor would I have liked it.

what about gsapp?

hey acceskb thanks for u r comment. i m also thinking of m arch 3 years course ,but refrained from applying to top tier arch school as i thought they pref   arch undergrad students over no baground in architecture.i have a bs in structural engineering

GSAPP anyone?? M.ARCH? MS.AAD? come onnn...

GSAPP statistic is generally 1 in 10/11. This is coming from someone I know that had sat on the admissions committee for the past few years (no longer does but I doubt the admissions has changed that much since then)...

Princeton's official stats here  (13% 2016)

https://gradschool.princeton.edu/sites/gradschool/files/admission_stats.pdf

GSD's here (overall 20% 2018)

https://www.gsd.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/GSD-Factbook.pdf

MIT's here (9% - 10% 2018)

http://web.mit.edu/annualreports/pres16/2016.03.01.pdf

GSAPP anyone?