Architecture, as we understand it, is based on three wisdoms that must be understood and intertwined: the wisdom of ecosystems, the wisdom of the craft itself, and the wisdom of the communities that inhabit the sites. This systemic approach to the project as a way of creating an architectural composition focuses on time rather than space because beauty is not assumed as an aesthetic preconception, but rather an emergent property of the dynamic interaction between natural systems, building systems, and the body’s systems. Beauty, then, is not found in buildings but in the life they shape inside and out.
This dual nature of the interior interacting with the exterior not only exists in buildings but also in university campuses, colleges, and other academic spaces scattered throughout the urban landscape, especially in downtown Bogotá, where nearly 21 higher education institutions are concentrated. Paradoxically, in Bogotá, most of these types of spaces are closed and gravitate independently around urban spaces, generating no connection between themselves or with the surrounding city. This closed position has already begun to be questioned, in order to begin opening spaces for encounter between the academic communities of different institutions, but also with local residents, tourists, and other urban actors.
Reviewing some bibliography on studies conducted in relation to pedagogical spaces, one can find that this condition of interior-exterior interaction first appears in the body. Many authors speak of student-centered education, and therefore, [1]autopsy is referred to as a process of self-formation. This has to do with the mind-body interaction mediated by thought, which then translates into the subject’s actions on the environment. The importance of the body’s interaction with the context can be understood, given that this becomes a place where thought is manifested, but also as a mechanism to alter it, closing a loop where information enters and exits through activity.
Image 1. Interior-Exterior in the body.
Thought, mind – body, action, subject – environment.
Image created based on educational theory studies in the attached bibliography.
If education is understood as a way of educating (directing) behaviors or values, it can be understood that, in some way, it is a physical manifestation of culture, materializing it in actions, spaces, and institutions. At all scales, pedagogy takes shape in space, and therefore, it is an issue that architecture must address in almost all projects, but especially in academic ones.
In some ways, it could be said that nature has historically become culture through language, and this can be written in words but also with elements that configure architectural spaces that generate relationships between the individual and their environment. Time becomes words, and nature becomes culture, to paraphrase Emilio Lledó.
Giving space meaning (attributing symbolic value) is perhaps the most important issue in pedagogical space. In Education and Democracy, John Dewey argues that one must be receptive to communication, and that this implies having a prolonged and rich experience. In part, it could be said that culture has guaranteed life for humans. What nutrition and reproduction are to physiological life, education is to social life, because social life is responsible for transmitting through communication in a process of shared experiences that become a shared possession. The same author says that social life is communication and communication is education, an exchange that also occurs in an environment. Something more than space, because it is the connection of the subjective world with the objective world; it is the realm of thoughts, feelings, and actions.
In 2010, the Universidad de los Andes commissioned David Delgado to direct a research project aimed at identifying ways to define the campus’s pedagogical experiences, based on a study called CAMPUS, which emerged within the Faculty of Architecture and Design. This initiative, led by Dean Alberto Miani, Department Director Rafael Villazón, and a group of professors and alumni from the Architecture and Design departments, generated a co-creation of principles that later led to the formulation of the new faculty building, designed by Daniel Bermúdez. The study was conducted in two directions: 1. To observe the preexisting spatiotemporal conditions on the current campus, and 2. To imagine the ideal relationships that should emerge with the new buildings in the future. To this end, direct observation and a series of collaborations with the academic community were conducted. After several months, the study was synthesized into five guiding principles that somehow condensed what could be the fundamental value of the Uniandino academic space. By then, prototype spaces were created that met these principles, attempting to shape new pedagogical spatial relationships. The space had to generate lessons and interact with the inhabitant (pedagogical); it had to be capable of combining the capacity for change (flexible); it had to bring together different communities at different times (integrative); it had to be bioclimatic and sustainable (organic); and it had to reflect the values inherent to the University and its architecture (memory).
Image 2. Above. T. Uniandes Block. Prototype. Below. Guiding Principles of the Pedagogical Experience at the Universidad de los Andes. Uniandes CAMPUS Project 2010.
Following these studies, a study was conducted for the National University to define the fundamental values that the new Faculty of Arts headquarters, which would replace the old building, should embrace. A series of analyses were conducted on the values generated by the current building’s space in pedagogical relationships, and the pedagogical models of Fritz Karzen and Leopoldo Rother, used for the layout of the campus in 1938, were also studied.
As a result of these studies, field observations, and work with academic communities, it was concluded that Rother’s initial idea was to foster encounters (in a certain way prefigured) not only between different areas of knowledge but also between actors, nature, landscape, and architecture. This initial intention had faded over time because most of the buildings constructed after the general plan was formulated had ignored the importance of experiencing the outdoors and had confined pedagogical activities within classrooms and self-absorbed spaces that had no connection to the plazas, green areas, and other campus spaces. The conclusion was clear: nature, the individual, the community, architecture, and now ICTs were scattered and needed to be woven into a single reality. Unification was necessary.
Architecture had to stop constructing boundaries that separated and instead create thresholds that reunited.
Image 3. The pedagogical space must be a space for encounters.
Image 4. Intermediate spaces. Inside outsides or outside insides.
Intermediate space.
In 2015, under the direction of architect Claudia Velandia, a study was conducted for the Universidad del Rosario in Bogotá to understand how a better relationship could be built between the university and its surroundings to ensure sustainability and, therefore, appreciation over time. This study, called Ciudad Sinergia, determined that the campus should be conceived as an urban element and, in some way, related to a pedagogical city. Not only should the classrooms gravitate around spaces shared with other classrooms, but spaces should also be created that integrate different actors, including those from the city who are not members of the academic community. This indeterminate space thus emerged: neither inside nor outside, neither private nor public, and not serving an exclusive academic function, but rather uses for recreation, relaxation, culture, or commerce.
Intermediate spaces are places where pedagogical leisure can be developed and where new bridges are created between areas of knowledge that were previously separated in classrooms or in different regions of the city and the country. An intermediate space not only alludes to the condition of being outside, protected from the elements, but above all, it is a space where the notion of the individual disappears amidst the encounter with oneself, with others, with nature, art, knowledge, information and communication technologies, architecture, objects of study, and any other element that may unexpectedly appear. They are spaces of wonder because they bring us out of the shadows, from physical and moral confinement. They are spaces where unexpected and therefore memorable things are revealed.
One of the great examples of these relationships is found at NYU, where the classroom is the city, and tourists can join in moments of study spent in plazas that serve as classrooms and connect buildings scattered throughout the area without a plan (at least an obvious one).
Image 5. Intermediate Spaces. Pedagogical City and Urban University.
Regarding the composition of the space, it can be said that this study changed a historical form of spatial configuration of the university, generating a new physical pedagogical model. The first lesson is that the university is not for teaching vertically, but rather, above all, processes are horizontal and have to do with the learning that each individual decides to undertake in different settings. A series of spaces were created at the Universidad del Rosario where students are immersed in interior landscapes in which the architecture introduces distant and forgotten natures. Native plants appear with their names, the birds they attract, and the pollinators associated with them. The names of nearby rivers and the paths of the sun also appear. In addition, one can watch television or work with Wi-Fi and print in coffee and food areas. These are places at the intersection of various circulations where walls (material) were removed to introduce sun and wind into old buildings that fragmented a reality that is now totalized. Bicycles that generate energy to connect phones or computers, and skateboards for reading while moving, were available. This allows the brain to work better because it is oxygenated by the accelerated heartbeat. All networks are visible and can be named so people know how the building works. Other university locations are also visible through giant screens. Mirror systems are used to reflect light and a sometimes blurred landscape from the enclosed spaces. These creative and learning spaces are based on the CRAI concepts that universities are testing with very positive results.
Images 6-7. Intermediate spaces between the past and the future of the Universidad del Rosario. CRAI prototypes.
In the designs for a kindergarten for the Compensar Family Compensation Fund, an area was created specifically for low-income children under 5 years of age. In these spaces, communities have the opportunity to study in a place where the greenery displaced by the city reappears in open-air classrooms covered with gardens and orchards. Through flexible, interconnected classrooms arranged around a courtyard, a space was created where nature is always a factor. In addition, a classroom and cafeteria area was designed that can be opened to the community of the surrounding neighborhoods and function independently while the garden is in the classroom, providing a meeting place that these communities lack. The responsibility of the educational spaces, then, is not only for those who enroll in an institution, but also involves a relationship with the ecosystem (water percolating into the subsoil), where vegetation, butterflies, birds, and the sun appear responsibly. The classrooms are spaces that serve during the day for classes and in the evenings for events or exhibitions. Additional income could be generated by opening the cafeterias to the context, creating plazas and courses so that citizens can take ownership of the space and love and care for it. Pedagogical spaces not only transform the space but, above all, the minds of those who live there (inside and outside). That has been the quest.
Images 8-9. Intermediate spaces between neighborhoods and their early childhood.
In the participatory study conducted for the Fenicia Progresa Partial Plan led by the Universidad de los Andes, the same principles as the Campus were applied, but in the formation of urban experiences. The communities received an explanation of what these spatial values could be and worked on their development to propose an urban piece that not only becomes a historic outlet from the campus to the city in physical and knowledge terms, but can also, in some way, represent a gradual opening of the campus to its neighborhood, generating an urban campus model that, in addition to renewing the area, creates a paradigm for how the city can be thought of and positively impacted from academia.
These studies, taken to a larger scale, allow us to understand the city itself as a place of learning. That was partly the direction given to the formulation of the CHB PEMP (Special Plan for the Management and Protection of Bogotá’s Historic Center), for which David Delgado was the director, drafted in 2018 and approved by the National Heritage Council.
The city itself must begin to understand itself as that intermediate space between geography and cultural events, between the past (memory) and future aspirations and visions. The Historic Center is an ideal place to build a civic culture of caring for one another and the environment. It is a center of knowledge that should serve as a laboratory for co-creating, in a co-responsible manner, a more competitive and sustainable version of Bogotá. The Center should be a place for disseminating values and building identity. A place to educate cultured, democratic, responsible, and creative citizens.
Image 10. Scenarios for civic culture. Progresa Fenicia. Uniandes 2013.
Image 11. Intermediate spaces between the city and the hills. The Historic Center of Bogotá. A place to learn and understand natural and cultural heritage. PEMP 2018. District Institute of Cultural Heritage.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
THE ORGANIZATION OF SPACE AND TIME IN EDUCATIONAL CENTERS. Joan Domenech Jesus Viñas. Editorial Grao – Barcelona.
PEDAGOGY OF SPACES. Theoretical Basis for the Analysis and Reconstruction of the Educativity of Spaces. D. MUÑOZ RODRÍGUEZ, JOSÉ MANUEL. Department of Theory and History of Education. University of Salamanca. March 2004. Rector: Dr. Ángel García del Dujo.
THEORY OF EDUCATION. Primary Processes in the Formation of Thought and Action. Joaquín García Carrasco, Ángel García del Lujo. University of Salamanca Publishing House.
WORDS TO DISARM. A Critical Look at the Vocabulary of Cultural Recognition. Editors: Margarita Rosa Serje de la Ossa and Maria Cristina Suaza Vargas. Roberto Pineda Camacho. Ministry of Culture. Colombian Institute of Anthropology and History.
HERDSA (Higher Education Research and Development) Volume 19 Number 2 July 2000 pp221-237. Place and Space in the Design of New Learning Environments.
EDUCATION AND DEMOCRACY. John Dewey. Stilwell, KS: Digireads.com Publishing, c2005.
LESSONS FOR STUDENTS IN ARCHITECTURE. Hertzberger, Herman. Rotterdam: Uitgeverij, 1993.
Popper’s Worlds. From: THE VARIATIONS OF IDENTITY. An Essay on Type in Architecture.
[1] Autopoiesis (from the Greek αυτο-, auto, ‘self’, and ποιησις, poiesis, ‘creation’ or ‘production’), is a neologism proposed in 1971 by Chilean biologists Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela to designate the organization of living systems. A brief description would be to say that autopoiesis is the condition of existence of living beings in the continuous production of themselves. THEORY OF EDUCATION. Primary processes of the formation of thought and action. Joaquín García Carrasco, Ángel García del Lujo. University of Salamanca Edition
