Well, I guess somebody has to be a deby downer...

You feature a lot of physical models which is great, but I find a lot of the photos themselves to be of extremely poor quality.
You've put all this time into building the model, why not invest the same time in properly setting up your backdrop, putting up a couple lights (or waiting for the right sunlight), get a tripod, and actually figure out your camera's white balance, aperture, and exposure controls. Don't be afraid of photoshop either.
Right now the shots look just point-and-shoot lazy.

Also, you need to really consider if pages 14 through 20 are what you want to show top-level M.Arch II programs.

For example, what am I looking at on pg 15? Is that your project? For school? For work? And why have you tacked on those horrendous 45 degree plans on either side of the birds-eye perspective? It hurts the legibility of the plans, and compositionally, looks weak.

As for some of the other drawings (namely pg 17 and 20)... I think they demonstrate an ability to draw, but to me at least, are lacking in criticality and even creativity. Remember, drawing can be a means to investigate, to try to understand or uncover something, but also to test a hypothesis (in much the same way a model can test an indea). I think that sort of inquisitiveness, would probably be appreciated by an admissions committee. As it stands, they apear purely representational.

Sorry, a bit harsh, I know... But you're applying to some of the best post-grad schools in the states, and if my co-workers M.ARch II portfolios (applying to some of the same schools) are any indication as to the competition, then you really need to step up your game.

I agree with most of IamGray's points. This isn't bad, but not exactly competitive for the programs you're applying to either. Also, you need more descriptions and organizational cues. Some viewers will get lost. Where's the cover?

i've seen a couple portfolios from people applying to/accepted to harvard etc. they feature a good deal of professional work...................
in good firms.
do you have anything like that that maybe you just forgot to add? that's the kind of stuff most of the people will have for those programs.

this guy went to gsd

http://www.michaeldavisarchitects.com/introduction/biography.html

i think the work is pretty solid actually. it would benefit from more abstract/ conceptual projects, but all in all, i think the main problem is the layout. it definitely needs more structure/ organizational cues and it needs a lot more visual breathing room.

let the viewer's eyes breathe. this shows that you have a bunch of projects, so i would actually suggest limiting what you include in your portfolio. if it's not your best work, consider removing the projects or only dedicating one spread to it.

with some re-working, it could be a fairly competitive portfolio. best of luck!

I agree that your portfolio has no clear structure. You need a cover, a table of contents, and some sort of descriptions for all of your work (especially on page 15) so that we know what we are looking at.

Also, I feel that the sequence in which you present your projects is illogical.
I was especially confused with the intro. to your black box theater project on p.2 - you introduce the project with just the detail of a wall, and the reader has to wade through several pages before they can find a picture (p.5) that shows the overall layout of a building. The same thing holds true for your docks in motion project (p.10) - one of the pictures on p.14 (probably the top picture) would work better as a way of introducing your project.
Think of how a film maker will start a scene off with an "establishing shot," showing the setting show that viewers can get their bearings, before going into closer shots that show the specific characters and dialog.

Also, to be honest, some of your drawings seem kind of tacky, namely the dog on the last page. Detailed but non-analytical drawings give off the impression that their creator is a technician with no creative ability. It would be good to see some work in a looser style. The drawing on the left of p. 18 shows more promise, though.

i actually do agree with word. i liked some of it....... but the way you laid it out made me think otherwise about it. listen to nonneutral and it should turn out for the better

Your application list is impressive but I would consider applying to some other schools as well.