Canadian architect here and you're correct (as far as I can remember) that the only two schools offering masters programs to non bachelors in architecture are UofT and UBC. Personally, I would pick UBC above UofT. I remember applying to grad schools many years ago and although I never followed through on my UBC application (I choose Waterloo), I've felt it's program to be much more varied than Toronto's especially if you are looking for a sustainable edge to your research/training.

If you're looking for sustainability and community UBC sounds like a good school as a lot of their projects are focused on regional issues and concerns ie. social housing in the DTES of Vancouver and the regions connection to water, forest, etc.  If you're looking for something more theory based and digital U of T is more appropriate because there is a large push there for those options, especially with the new professors they've brought in. That being said, there are a few great professors at U of T that are focused on issues of sustainability as well. From my experience though, U of T is a more rigorous school with a faculty that is much more impressive than UBC's. Hope this helps a bit.

University of Calgary, U of Manitoba, Carleton, and Dalhousie are also open to non-arch backgrounds btw.  

Strangefires, those schools accept non-arch students now? Well, that's good to know. Thanks for the update.

Yes, Calgary has started a 2-year program with a 1-year qualifying to start (I believe), so 3-years, Dalhousie has their 2+2 BEDS/M.Arch program, and Carleton has started a 3.5-year M.Arch for non-arch backgrounds based around the US model of schools. I didn't know UM was doing this to be honest.

I will say its much more competitive than applying to the 2-year programs, so you'll need to get your sh*t together. Sounds like you have the ideal background for it though.

OP, you are right.  Options in Canada are limited to few schools.  Add Calgary, though.  The province of Quebec's universities sadly do not offer the career change M.Arch.

I went to UBC from 2006-2010. While I didn't really look at any other schools aside from U of Manitoba, I wasn't impressed with the experience. I came from a visual arts undergrad myself and found the transition to be pretty difficult. 

I did however really enjoy the design build studio I took part of in the downtown east side. The experience I got there seemed to be far more relevant than any other studio.

I did the 2-year pre-qualifier + 2-year M.Arch at UManitoba.  BenC is right, these programs are very competitive (9 people accepted in my year - 3 dropped out and I was the only one to finish on time).

I also come from a fine arts background. Being able to express an idea and clearly communicate your work will give you a huge advantage. Good luck.

For the Carleton 3.5-year, I heard through the grapevine numbers were in the range of 15 accepted, with ~200 applying.

Thanks, everyone! 

Ideally I'd like a good balance between perimetrics/modelling and sustainable building practices. Toronto's the more practical option for me, for financial reasons -- it's closer to home, and looks to have more scholarships available. Well-regarded professors is always a nice thing, but how far does that go in an educational context?

@strangefires — Dalhousie is sort of interesting to me due to their more community-oriented ethos. Is there any word on how good the BEDS programme there is? I'm considering taking that to broaden the field of MArch schools available to me. Also digging the design + build / co-op system. 

As far as the portfolio is concerned, I am assuming that they'll be looking for 2D/3D reasoning skills and design aptitude... are they judged as separate from those with an Architecture background? I'm quite confident in my drafting and CAD skills, but don't really have anything in a strictly architectural context to show. 

@chris-chitect -- What did you find difficult about the transition? 

are they judged as separate from those with an Architecture background?

Of course. It would be silly to put your portfolio next to an architect undergrads and call it an even ball game. I believe most schools go around 50/50 on students with architecture undergrad degrees and those without.

KrtKrt, most schools evaluate entrance portfolios blind to the applicant's grades/background. At least that is how I remember them explaining it to me when I was applying. Computer drafting skills are irrelevant for M.Arch as those are not things they care about... the importance of the portfolio should be placed on a wide range of skills from abstract to 1:1 construction if available. I cannot tell you how many portfolios I've seen tossed away because the applicant put in full working drawings when the requirements suggested hand-drawings or sketches. A good M.arch portfolio is one where it showcases a variety of projects in all scales but also depicts a decent start-to-finish narrative.

They won't care if you can draft. This is something you will learn, and probably only properly when on the job.

the portfolio should show your best work and aptitude for thinking in 3 dimensions. Also, try to show how you arrived at your final work, they are just as interested in seeing how you think and work through an idea as they are in seeing that you can communicate the final image/product effectively.

if you don't have an architectural background they won't expect to see building designs or whatever, but if you have anything that leans towards an architectural sensibility, showing your interest in the subject, then I would think that would be beneficial.

good luck!

Your portfolio and aptitude is miles beyond what most people have when applying for arch. master's, at least at Dal. All ya have to do is beat this:

http://architectureandplanning.dal.ca/architecture/visitors/student_portfolios.shtml

You would definitely get into Dalhousie's BEDS program and would be well ahead of many of your peers. I wouldn't be as confident as Stephanie here about the M. Arch though. You definitely have some level of craft and visual thinking but they would likely have you "repeat" a few terms of the BEDS program to help you channel your skills to more architectural pursuits. While the portfolios above may be rough, many of them do demonstrate a level of architectural problem-solving which is difficult to glean from your more polished visual art. I would still apply, though, because you do have a good chance of getting some sort of advanced standing.

All that said, I don't know if Dalhousie focuses much on "community." A number of professors have experience in social housing (some much more than others) but that's likely the case at any school.

KrtKrt, I think Bowling_ball said it best. I couldn't communicate my ideas very well. I wasn't used to having to defend everything I did in my visual arts undergrad. I also found the atmosphere to be quite negative. There seemed to be a lot of unnecessary drama and theatre going on and a bizarre master and slave attitude that went on among students and professors. Just wasn't what I was used to in my undergrad. 

In my opinion what to look for in an architecture school is somewhere that is going to inspire you to think of what architecture could be, rather than simply what it is.  WIth that, look for the school that is going to give you that feeling. Practical skills are necessary, yes, but that's in order to get a job. It's another story to be a leader.  The other skills come after. Go to the school that will make you a leader, and develop your conceptual thinking to the very best it can be.  That's why in my opinion, look through the faculty lists at the schools and decide who and where speaks to you.  Architecture programs tend to be small areas, and the relationships you build with professors can determine how much you learn and how good your work CAN be, especially when it comes to thesis projects and your career thereafter. 

I graduated from U of C in 2011, I entered just when they were changing to a 3 year program from the 4 (I got to choose between them after my 1st year). As has been said they do accept non-arch major. They also have a few professors who are quite heavy into parametrics (Jason Johnson, Vera Parlac and Josh Taron). Look at what the faculty are doing and decide from there. Wherever you go, you can decide how you want to focus your time and what areas, it is your education after-all. FWIW I thought there was a good education there, lots of good profs. that know their stuff.

I should also add about Dal that their major proponent for parametric modelling recently resigned, if that's important to you.

^ ^ Well there's a bombshell... Cocococo check your PM's