How to Cite: Sánchez Bernal, Mónica y Carolina Blanco. "The Unpostponable Incorporation of the Gender Perspective into Architectural Education in the 21st Century". Dearq no. 41 (2025): 104-114. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18389/dearq41.2025.03
How to Cite: Sánchez Bernal, Mónica y Carolina Blanco. "The Unpostponable Incorporation of the Gender Perspective into Architectural Education in the 21st Century". Dearq no. 41 (2025): 104-114. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18389/dearq41.2025.03
Mónica Sánchez Bernal
Universidad de los Andes, Colombia
Carolina Blanco
Universidad de los Andes, Colombia
Received: December 1, 2023 | Accepted: June 14, 2024
Teaching serves as a tool for shaping society by guiding the training of students, incorporating different perspectives across disciplinary fields, and reflecting the era's characteristics or the transformations it seeks to achieve. This article presents the experiences and reflections from the course "Arquitectura con enfoque de género y diferencial" (Architecture with a Gender and Differential Perspective), a pioneering initiative in urban-architectural design implemented as part of the undergraduate program at Universidad de los Andes in 2022 and 2023. The course is grounded in the belief that integrating these perspectives into practice and research can improve quality of life for women and diverse people, fostering inclusive, habitable, empathetic, and safe physical-spatial environments.
Keywords: Gender perspective in architecture, inclusive public space, feminist urbanism, gender and differential perspective, urban gender indicators, inclusive teaching, care blocks.
There is a tacit reality in all architecture designed with a gender and differential perspective. This reality becomes evident in the exterior skin of buildings, generously sized façade openings with complementary ground-floor activities, a genuine concern for every detail in the surrounding public space, the choice of materials, application of universal accessibility principles, the integration of vegetation, lighting design within and outside the project, and the elimination of blind walls, bridges with limited visibility, or dead-end alleys that often become hiding spots or dumping grounds, among other aspects.
For those approaching architecture with a gender and differential perspective as a line of inquiry, it is common to observe that these approaches, when applied to the teaching of architecture, are often met with reservation, rejection, or misunderstanding in professional practice, particularly by individuals unfamiliar with their context. A century ago, Teodoro de Anasagasti (1923), in his text on teaching architecture "Enseñanza de la Arquitectura: Cultura moderna técnico artística," noted the limited presence of female students and graduates in Spain, declaring that this situation inevitably reduced the possibility of nurturing discussions about other realities in the classroom and in the profession.
At the turn of this century, Leonie Milliner (2000), after reviewing the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) statistics, criticized the controls and norms in architectural education that symbolically delegitimize the presence of women and diverse people as well as their concerns.
These questions about the relevance of such perspectives at the undergraduate level reveal resistance to their implementation and permanence in the everyday discourse of architectural education. In line with these pedagogical concerns and after teaching the Unit in Architecture with a gender and differential perspective between 2022 and 2023 at the Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá-Colombia, we, as professors in charge, present an overview of this experience, share its results and some reflections on the social meaning of architecture, and suggest that this type of courses are not novel or exotic but should be normalized as structuring courses in the basic training of undergraduate architecture faculties around the world.
Rehumanizing architecture begins with understanding the specific spatial needs of those—women, for example—who do not fit into the neutral archetype of the typical inhabitant. Although such archetypes may aid standardization, they exclude the diversity of bodies and the flexible use of space.
What is the purpose of a specialized course like this and what can it achieve? What should its permanence depend on? How does architecture change with the application of a gender and differential perspective? What do students gain by exploring architecture through these lenses? What does academia contribute to the debate on integrating these perspectives into architecture?
These questions are posed from the perspective of teaching and research as a theoretical-practical framework to achieve inclusive, habitable, empathetic, and safe physical-spatial outcomes, rooted in the social and human dimensions of architecture.
Following an internal call for new course proposals, we developed the specialization unit "Arquitectura con enfoque de género y diferencial," comprising two courses that were taken simultaneously, each with interconnected theoretical and practical components.
This article summarizes the experiences of four cohorts, taught over eight-week cycles with eight hours of weekly in-person instruction (six hours in the Project course and two in the Tools course). Both courses were consolidated through systematic exercises: in the Tools course, these included interdisciplinary sessions with experts, analysis of national regulatory readings and international declarations, and the creation of a collective manifesto by each cohort. In the Project course, spatial exploration was approached through specific methodologies using the body, exploratory routes, reference analysis, and architectural design within the framework of Alcaldía Mayor de Bogotá's (2021) Land Use Plan (Plan de Ordenamiento Territorial [POT]) and its concept of the "ideal care block" (Manzana del cuidado ideal).
As explained at the start of the course, the goal is not to "convert" students into feminists but rather to train professionals who are conscious about the responsibility to integrate gender and differential perspectives into architecture and to experience their positive impact on architectural design and the lives of its inhabitants.
Throughout the semester, we facilitated conversations to understand what had motivated the students to enroll in the unit. We used real-time feedback tools to obtain anonymous data that would complement the university's semester-end course evaluation survey. Based on this feedback, we added indicators after the first semester or year that allow for comparison and measurement, as long as the data was available and gender-disaggregated from the time of collection.
Through physical and digital forms completed during course exercises, we compiled information based on gender-related urban variables and indicators linked to the body, time use, and space use. After systematizing this data, trends and changes are observed among cohorts, such as age, height, or place of origin (initially from Bogotá, later with greater participation from other Colombian cities and abroad), as illustrated in the statistical summary (table 1). An intersectional perspective emerged from individual students, such as the non-binary participant, as well as the group's overall diversity. These indicators revealed how conditions, cultures, gender identities, and even physicality create differences—not only among genders but also among peers—for example, in how we walk or move.
Table 1_Statistical synthesis. Course graphic 2022-2023. Source: the author.
As summarized in table 1, a total of 88 students participated in the unit-course, with an average of 22 per cohort and only one student repeating. The gender composition demonstrated interest in the subject from both women and men, with more women enrolled in the first cohort (85%) and greater male participation (40%) in the third. The exchange students included six women from universities in France, Germany, Spain, and Mexico, along with two men from Sweden and one from Spain. An individual from one cohort identified as non-binary. Since we began inquiring about sexual orientation in the third cohort (2023), six students identified as lesbian and four as gay (24.4% of 41 students). Within the diversities represented, there was one indigenous student and two Afro-descendants—one self-identified as such and also as a victim of armed conflict, while the other chose not to disclose any ethnic affiliation.
In the second semester of 2022, we began asking about caregiving activities. Initially, none of the 63 students surveyed (68.3% women) identified as caregivers. However, when specifically asked who they cared for, women predominantly reported caring for elderly family members, minors, or others. One male student reported caring for his brother with cognitive disabilities. Care for individuals with chronic illnesses was equally distributed, with two cases in total. Self-care was reported by 84% of students, with higher prevalence among men (95%) than women (79%). Caring for pets was also significant: 39% for men and 43.8% for women.
Over these two years, 21.6% of the students reported visual impairments, with a higher prevalence among women. Only one student mentioned having a mobility limitation. Regarding transportation, 78.3% of men used private vehicles compared to 50% of women. In contrast, 64% of women used public transportation compared to 60.9% of men. Women also exhibited higher usage of carpooling, taxis, and ride-hailing apps (34.4% vs. 26.1%), often seeking security in identifiable individuals. Notably, in the first cohort, women's bicycle usage was twice that of men, although overall bicycle and motorcycle use was low (6.8% of the total, and 4.7% among women). The non-binary individuals walked, used cars, and took taxis to minimize direct physical contact and avoid harassment.
Physical attributes emerged as another differentiating factor. In terms of height, 16% fit the Modulor standard of 1.82 m (1.80-1.85 m), all men and the non-binary individual. Women under 1.66 m (41%) reported challenges deriving from being far from the modern ergonomic design standard, such as difficulties reaching items in cupboards or holding onto overhead bus bars. The average height for women was 1.64 m (ranging from 1.50-1.73 m), while men averaged 1.78 m (ranging from 1.66-1.85 m).
In 2023, 78% of students encountered gender and differential perspectives for the first time, while six women and three men had prior knowledge of them. What motivates a student to enroll in courses like this? For this advanced unit, students expressed motivations such as interest, novelty, curiosity, knowledge expansion, practical application, current relevance, faculty reputation, or recommendations. Only two of the 88 students enrolled due to scheduling or availability.
Using this type of information, which was discussed in class and captured anonymously via interactive QR codes, we visualized response proportions and introduced each cohort to a process of self-recognition and comparative analysis aimed at emphasizing the differential spatial experiences of various bodies within the city.
The course featured an outstanding panel of experts, including architects Ana Falú and Inés Sánchez de Madariaga; Jennifer Cañaveral Guzmán, the first Colombian architect with hearing disabilities; Dr. Paola Jirón Martínez, an urban and regional planning expert; attorney Isabel Agatón Santander; social psychologist Florence Thomas; and Blanca Valdivia Gutiérrez of Col•lectiu Punt6.
Other guest speakers included architect Julio Abel Sánchez; Luis Miguel Fajardo Gallo (2023), who presented his architectural thesis "El psicoide, un espacio entre la sombra, un vestido y el cuerpo de una travesti" and is also an alumnus of this advanced unit; Margarita Caicedo Díaz, counselor for the Right to Habitat and Dignified Housing at the Consultative Council of Women of Bogotá (CCM); Patrick Morales, director of the District Institute of Cultural Heritage (IDPC); and representatives from the District System of Care (SIDICU) and the local Women's Equality Opportunity House (Casa CIOM) of the District Secretariat for Women (SDMujer). Over a period of two years, a total of 23 encounters and 43 hours of knowledge exchange with individuals involved in territorial work, public policy drafting, and women's rights advocacy were carried out during the sessions.
Figures 1 and 2_ Encounters with Ana Falú and Inés Sánchez de Madariaga. Source: authors' archive.
Figures 3 and 4_ Encounters with Jennifer Cañaveral and SIDICU. Source: authors' archive.
Figures 5 and 6_ Encounters with Margarita Caicedo, Florence Thomas, and Julio Abel Sánchez. Source: authors' archive.
Without doubt, feminist methodologies aimed at addressing urban issues affecting women differentially have developed observation and citizen participation approaches (see Michaud 2002; Rainero 2005; Col•lectiu Punt6 2019, 2021; Equal Saree 2015; Proyekta Urbes 2023) to improve residential, work, cultural, and recreational environments. As Chinchilla (2020) emphasizes in her work with children, it is the context that renders individuals weak or strong in unequal ways, turning characteristics into vulnerabilities.
Adapting these interests to the course, we conducted exploratory walks to engage directly with the city through sight, touch, hearing, smell, and emotion. Fieldwork, guided by a feminist perspective ("violet glasses"), was essential to identify urban issues. Measuring sidewalk widths and heights, calculating ramp inclinations, documenting urban furniture, noting the presence or absence of vegetation, witnessing falls and street harassment, and georeferencing critical points or missing elements transformed the approach to induce inclusive public space design.
Figure 7_ Measuring ramp inclinations in the city. Source: authors' archive.
Understanding time use concerning space and the body, a concept also proposed by feminists, is vital for architectural and urban decision-making as well as economic planning.
In the first year, students mapped out their activities in detail to compare weekday and weekend routines, including time spent on study, meals, personal care, recreation, commuting, and sleep. Through this exercise, they realized the number of hours that were wasted in traffic and inadequate restorative sleep.
In the second year, students expanded this exercise by measuring their physical effort and that of their peers, recording changes in oxygenation, blood pressure, heart rate, body mass index (BMI), and travel times across three on-campus circuits that simulated the city's topographic conditions (flat, inclined, and staircases). As with height, walking speed is not uniform, as demonstrated by a population study conducted at pedestrian crossings in Barcelona (Menéndez 2002). Aging, disabilities, temporary or chronic illnesses, situational awareness, or footwear all impact vital signs, perception, and movement efficiency.
Figure 8_ Staircase circuit. Source: authors' archive.
Figure 9_ Walking in high heels. Source: the author.
Table 2_ Walking Speed Ranges Recorded (2023). Source: the author.
The participants' ages ranged from 19 to 29 years. The circuits were free of vehicles and traffic lights and were conducted outdoors under sunny conditions or indoors on rainy days, at Bogota's altitude of 2,650-2,670 meters above sea level.
In 2021, Bogotá incorporated the concept of care blocks (manzanas del cuidado) into urban planning regulations through its Land Use Plan (POT). This intersectoral initiative aims to build on existing infrastructure by interconnecting both pre-existing and newly established social facilities with housing and public transportation in close proximity. The policy sought to recognize, reduce, and redistribute caregiving activities, which are still predominantly carried out by women. Women represent 93% of the population engaged exclusively in caregiving, dedicating on average 35% more hours per week to unpaid domestic and caregiving tasks than men (OMEG 2022, 5).
As part of this framework, we chose Care Block No. 24 in the Fenicia district (MZC 24 2021) as our study area, where students, working in pairs, created their architectural projects.
In 2022, students selected intervention sites to design facilities, neighborhood parks, or housing projects. Common programmatic elements included collective housing, a safe house, a market, and the headquarters of Casa CIOM with an autonomous space for the CCM. Additional facilities designed included a care home for elderly lesbians, bicycle parking, Wellness Centers (CEFE), training centers, and spaces for emotional support, childcare, palliative care, and care for individuals with visual or cognitive disabilities.
In 2023, we focused the projects along an urban renewal strip. It was deemed necessary that all projects include public amenities such as caregiving facilities, lactation rooms, and public restrooms on the ground floors, housing units on the upper floors, and basement parking. A total of forty-seven architectural projects explored the integration of gender and differential approaches.
Figure 10_ Collective model with semester proposals from 2022-10, 2023-20, 2023-10, and 2023-20. Source: authors' archive.
Globally, urban insecurity for women intensifies at night (Roberts 2013; Sánchez Bernal 2012). For this reason, a key design exercise involved considering how each project interacts with public space during both daytime and nighttime, posing a challenge in terms of project design, graphic representation, and technological solutions.
Beyond aesthetics, functionality is essential to promote: (1) the presence of "eyes on the street" (a concept introduced by Jane Jacobs in 1961); (2) proper lighting and active ground-floor uses that enhance the quality of public spaces; and (3) programming for 24/7 uses and activities—excluding high-impact businesses—to ensure restorative sleep for residents, combat insecurity, avoid the objectification of women's bodies and protect their mental and physical well-being.
Figures 11 and 12_ Nighttime renderings, students Sabrina Zielcke and Manuela Vargas.
Figure 13_ Nightlight analysis, students Sabrina Zielcke and Manuela Vargas.
Anonymous feedback collected through university surveys revealed that students found the course unique, as it was "the only one focused on teaching the gender approach in architecture," and valued its societal relevance. They appreciated the opportunity to spatialize theoretical discussions in urban-architectural design, with one student describing it as "a magical subject" that opened new perspectives on architecture. The unit prompted students to rethink prior learning and recognize the value of collective contributions, often expressed as "a collective education among all".
Some students agreed that the articulation of both subjects consolidated the unit, through theoretical and practical exercises, something that added knowledge for the development of the architectural project, as well as the work presented by the other pairs for joint learning, perceived as "a collective education." Regarding the class dynamics, they mentioned that "the course goes beyond the classroom." Many students emphasized that the course addressed real-world issues and suggested extending it from eight to sixteen weeks (a full semester), introducing it in earlier semesters, or making it a mandatory course.
Regarding the invited speakers, students wrote, "It was a delight to have so many important guests, enriching our knowledge and desire to learn more." Through lectures, presentations, and other activities, students deepened their understanding of the relationship between women and architecture as a critical component of designing safe and inclusive urban environments.
From their own gendered experiences, students noted that the unit "teaches you to see and think about the city and projects with women, their experiences, and their safety as a central focus." One male student admitted initial skepticism, expecting the course to be "too extreme," but ultimately found it respectful, stating, "I felt very comfortable as a man in this class," and recognizing the relevance of these concepts to his architectural career. A female student reflected on her identity as a Latin American woman, realizing how small design changes "can save a woman's life and integrity".
In a poetic reflection, another student summarized the impact of the unit for his personal and professional path: "The ideas presented will always stay with me and accompany my future projects".
In a world where gender-based violence persists in both public and private spaces, addressing gender and differential approaches during undergraduate studies—and throughout the architectural curriculum—is essential, even more so knowing that architecture can either exacerbate or improve safety conditions for everyone. This pedagogical approach is relevant and beneficial for women, men, and non-binary individuals.
It also calls for consideration of childhood, disabilities, and aging populations, emphasizing the need to design cities that support everyday life and caregiving activities. Given the complexity of the topic, more than eight weeks are required to adequately cover the content. In fact, these kind of courses—specialized units—have now transitioned to 16 weeks. Knowing how it has been done before and exploring the project, contributes to form criteria enabling to face the challenge in the practice.
Acknowledging the historical and methodological responsibility of feminist-led design processes and unafraid of calling things as they are, we highlight the importance of using the words "feminist" or "gender" transparently in the course titles to reflect their content and disciplinary significance. Also, the use of specific feminist methodologies characterized as experiential and body-oriented as the core of the architectural design process helped those seeking to increase their disciplinary knowledge in this research line and praxis.
By emphasizing the physical and experiential dimensions of design, this unit fosters critical thinking and addresses the exclusion of those with different identities, thoughts, or experiences. The difficulties, vulnerabilities or diverse positions that may exist among those who study at this private university also deserve reflection in order to recognize the differences and assume them in the academic, social and personal spheres. In professional practice, architecture and urban planning bear an ethical responsibility to address the physical and spatial needs of both majority and minority groups.
Familiarity with measurement tools like blood pressure monitors to understand human body behavior, altimeters and speedometers to know time and distances within an specific place, helps contextualize urban navigation and reminds us that movement through the city changes over time, requiring responsive architectural solutions.
Collecting data anonymously, systematically, and directly from students allowed us to recognize characteristics and abilities that are empathetic to differences when practicing the profession and as a constituent part of their training. In the short term, we recommend that the data be consolidated and disaggregated by sex and as gender and differential indicators.
The unit's experience demonstrates its potential as a structural course in the curriculum. However, it should remain an elective to ensure enrollment by motivated students, preventing a lack of commitment that could harm the course's objectives and collective process within the framework of this process led by feminists focused on addressing and solving social problems through architecture. Clarifying theoretical and historical misconceptions is crucial for applying these lessons in professional practice.
We commend the academic leadership of Dean Hernando Barragán and Architecture Department Director Claudia Mejía in supporting this initiative. While this course is not the first to address gender in architectural education, we hope it will not be the last.
Figure 14_ Model of the project with the renewal strip and backdrop of the real city. Source: authors' archive.