Um Gleichstellung, Diversität und Inklusion in der Architekturlehre zu stärken und vermitteln, werden jedes Semester zwei Lehraufträge durch die Arbeitsgruppe Parity TUM Architecture am Department of Architecture der TUM School of Engineering and Design (ED) vergeben.
Der Lehrauftrag „Aktuelle Fragestellungen aus Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft“ (2 SWS, 3 ECTS) wird im Wintersemester 2025/26 von Sandra Cabrales gestaltet und in englischer Sprache durchgeführt. Im Zentrum stehen Kommunikation, Machtstrukturen und Rollenbilder in der Architektur sowie deren Wirkung auf Diskurs und gebaute Umwelt.
To strengthen and advance equality, diversity and inclusion in architectural education, two teaching assignments are awarded each semester by the Parity TUM Architecture working group at the Department of Architecture of the TUM School of Engineering and Design (ED).
The teaching assignment “Current Issues in Science and Society” (2 SWS, 3 ECTS) will be developed and taught in the winter semester 2025/26 by Sandra Cabrales and conducted in English. The seminar focuses on communication, power structures and role models in architecture and examines how they shape both disciplinary discourse and the built environment.
Their ideas shape famous projects, but their names disappear from history, price lists, and curricula. Denise Scott Brown, Eileen Gray, and Lu Wenyu are examples of female pioneers whose work often remains invisible.
Historically developed power structures continue to have an impact today, in studios, offices, and the media.
The star logic of architecture, the idea of the “individual genius”, ignores teamwork and complex interrelationships and leads to the permanent invisibility of female architects.
As part of a seminar in the Department of Architecture at TUM, we examine how these power structures still operate and how communication, role models, and decision-making processes shape us and our architecture praxis. Who decides which topics are considered important, how are contributions weighted, which voices are heard, and who is left out? These questions inevitably lead to a critical look at our own position in teams and projects.
Communication is more than just the spoken word. “You cannot not communicate,” says Paul Watzlawick, everything we do influences processes, decisions, and visibility. Who speaks loudest in the team, and why? What tone of voice do we use, and in which situations do we withdraw? What words do we use to make ourselves smaller or bigger?
The aim is to establish a shared language that ensures all voices are heard and leads to more inclusive decision-making.
Power manifests itself subtly in price lists, decisions, evaluation systems, and project allocations. Who makes decisions, and who is not asked? Which topics are considered important, and which are devalued? Power is often passed on unconsciously, but this is precisely where the opportunity lies: those who recognize power structures can question them and consciously shape them.
We face the challenge of consciously reflecting on power, questioning roles, and shaping communication in a targeted manner. Those who know their own voice, distribute visibility, and recognize power structures contribute to teams working more equally and spaces being planned more inclusively.
Architecture is always also a social practice, and spaces reflect the power relations in which they are created.
In the upcoming seminars, we will learn tools for communication, feminist planning, critical design perspectives, and teamwork. The goal is to consciously design structures, make voices visible, and plan spaces fairly, who speaks, and who remains invisible?
Only through critical questioning, interdisciplinary cooperation, and the conscious involvement of all participants can planning processes be developed that break down old hierarchies and promote equal opportunities and diversity.
In professional life, there is often a sense or even a pressure to communicate with project partners, employees, supervisors, and colleagues mainly on the content level. Stress, problems, and conflicts, however, usually arise on the relationship level. So it is rarely about the “what,” but rather about the “how.”
Many people listen to respond, not to understand. Speaking means receiving attention, listening means giving attention. It is precisely this shift that is at the root of many misunderstandings.
Under pressure, many people resort to automatic response patterns. Fight. Flight. Freeze.
In such moments, communication quickly becomes harsh, unclear, or hurtful. Responsible work requires awareness of how stress changes one's own behavior and how sensitively the relationship level reacts to it.
Communication on an equal footing means adopting an OK OK position. Both sides are OK. The person is separated from the problem. Motives and reactions are taken seriously. Virginia Satir's idea is groundbreaking here: if we knew everything about a person, we would like them or at least understand them.
Successful conversations arise from clarity, preparation, and the ability to assess one's own impact. This also includes an awareness of one's own patterns and sensitivities. What challenges us and why. Where do tensions arise? Those who are aware of these dynamics encounter others with more calm and prevent unnecessary escalations.
Another pattern that repeatedly becomes apparent is that people often talk past each other. Details are lost and interpretations take over. Appreciation is demonstrated by listening carefully and perceiving what is said precisely.
Communication at eye level is an active choice. It is becoming increasingly important in an industry that is often characterized by overtime, pressure, and exhausting working conditions. How are architects supposed to design spaces in which people feel comfortable when their own working environments convey the opposite?
Good work is created where people work in healthy, appreciative, and inclusive structures.
This attitude is a prerequisite for successful collaboration and sustainable quality.
Work in progress. The seminar content will be published here step by step.
This seminar is developed by Sandra Cabrales and carried out with the engagement of all participating students. Their perspectives, reflections and critical questions form the foundation of the collective learning process. The written and visual documentation, including the integration of the process outcomes of their peers, was prepared by four students of the seminar group.
Students
Anna Lena Adam
Aida Aherdan
Brit Austermühl
Elle Böhm
Emilio Braune
Nele Sofie Budnik
Léontine Chenebaux
Marie Gebel
Moritz Hemsal
Felix Mascotto
Charlotte-Emilia Meinecke
Alba Ramos Gomez
Vidal Res
Louisa Schütz
Victoria Rosina Stetter
Editorial and Design
Brit Austermühl
Marie Gebel
Charlotte-Emilia Meinecke
Louisa Schütz
The seminar materials provided on this website do not claim to be complete. All information is supplied without guarantee. No liability is assumed for the accuracy, timeliness, or any consequences arising from the use of these materials.