The undisciplined discipline: architecture and its other possible practices
A conversation with Ross Exo Adams and Ivonne Santoyo-Orozco, Co-Directors of Bard Architecture at Bard College, and Stephanie Lin, Dean of The School of Architecture, on the relationships between pedagogy, professional practice, and politics.

Bard Architecture at the liberal arts Bard College and The School of Architecture are two experimental architecture programmes in the US. While the first is undergraduate and unaccredited for licensure, and the second is graduate and accredited, both attempt to set new standards and methodologies in the panorama of architecture schools through their innovative pedagogical approaches, proposing different ways of practicing architecture and contributing to shaping the architect’s political role.

This conversation is part of KoozArch’s Issue #03 | New Rules for School.

VALERIO FRANZONE Bard Architecture is a new programme founded at Bard College, a liberal arts college, while The School of Architecture has a long history that recently culminated in a new location and name. Can you tell me your stories and what urgencies drove you to (re)start an architecture school today?

STEPHANIE LIN The School of Architecture has had many “startup” phases in its history and has been a continuous experiment that has evolved for over 90 years. It started from Frank Lloyd Wright's Taliesin fellowship, founded in 1932 at Taliesin in Spring Green, Wisconsin. Starting in 1937, the school regularly moved back and forth between Wisconsin in the summer and Arizona in the winter. It wasn't officially a school but a fellowship and apprenticeship until 1986, when it was accredited by the Higher Learning Commission. It became accredited by NAAB1 in 1992. In January 2020, it announced its closure, but a couple of months later the board reversed that decision. In May 2020, during the peak of the pandemic and the George Floyd protests, I was invited to be part of the school as it was planning a relocation to Arcosanti. I was teaching at the Cooper Union at the time. It was a time of major upheaval in the world, and there was a demand for new forms of participation. The priority was to continue this educational experiment but bring it into the context of global social and environmental crises. After months of planning, I started my job in January 2021.

"The School of Architecture has had many 'startup' phases in its history and has been a continuous experiment that has evolved for over 90 years."

- Stephanie Lin

In August 2023, TSOA relocated from Arcosanti to Cattle Track Arts Compound, an artists' historical campus in Scottsdale, Arizona, with a notable history of experimental building. The school has undergone so much change, which is now a strong part of our identity and propels us to reflect and challenge ourselves continuously.

IVONNE SANTOYO-OROZCO I love how your curriculum is an ongoing education project; we also believe it’s crucial to continuously revise our pedagogical goals with our faculty and students. We have a shorter history, but we’ve incorporated Bard’s broader pedagogy into our curriculum. Bard College is in upstate New York and is founded upon liberal arts education, which emphasises a cross-disciplinary approach to higher education. Prior to our involvement at Bard, President Leon Botstein created a working group with Stan Allen, Barry Bergdoll, Deborah Berke, Kate Orff, Trustee member James von Klemperer, as well as our colleagues Ellen Driscoll and Olga Touloumi. This group supported the creation of an undergraduate architecture programme, building on the liberal arts curriculum. Then, in 2019, Ross and I came in and we were given full autonomy to develop and propose a full curriculum. We were interested in Bard's long history in experimental pedagogy, in its mission as “a private institution for the public good” and in programmes like the Bard Early College and the Bard Prison Initiative.2 We have educational backgrounds from the Berlage, the AA, and Ross at the London Consortium, so we were familiar with and interested in intentional pedagogical models. When we started setting the curriculum, we tried to respond to wider demands in the field for questions on spatial justice. While these demands preceded the wider racial reckoning of the summer of 2020, the timing was crucial to give pedagogical form to these urgent demands. The curriculum approval process involved a lot of meaningful conversations with faculty across Bard, from different disciplines, who generously workshopped the curriculum with us. We were lucky enough to have feedback from faculty members we admired from Human Rights, Anthropology, History, Environmental and Urban Studies, Studio Arts, and endless helpful conversations with our colleague Olga Touloumi. The curriculum design was, indeed, a collective effort.

"Bard College is in upstate New York and is founded upon liberal arts education, which emphasises a cross-disciplinary approach to higher education."

- Ivonne Santoyo-Orozco


KOOZ Stephanie, was there any pedagogical connection with Arcosanti, or was it purely a logistical match?

SL Our former location at Arcosanti, a fellow nonprofit, has priorities similar to ours: it’s focused on learning by doing, building with the landscape and with ecological sensitivity. It wasn't hard to translate our curriculum into that context, with the added layer of Arcosanti’s unique form of community and the task of integrating ours. After a year, we created a new class called Arcosanti in Context, led by Professor Daniel Ayat, that engaged the various departments at Arcosanti to provide students the opportunity to interact meaningfully with the community. This place also impacted our thesis design-build programme, also known as The Shelter Program, which evolved from the early days of the Fellowship when apprentices built tents to live immersively in the desert environment; then, in 2018, under Aaron Betsky, it was formalised as part of the thesis requirement, and students continued to build single occupancy shelters for dwelling. As we moved to Arcosanti, and later to Cattle Track, our shelters became more participatory and answered more directly to a wider community’s needs. The students took ownership of a new model inviting the whole community to the project reviews to provide feedback from a different perspective from a typical studio. It was an incredible, student-led, challenging process that evolved the thesis sequence toward producing projects for the wider public versus the individual.


KOOZ The built environment shows several criticalities linked to architecture’s failure and its connection to capitalism. We must re-understand architecture’s limits and potential to determine its possible new role. How do your schools address the capitalist dogmas and their implications, and how do they reshape the role of design in addressing environmental, societal, cultural, and technological urgencies?

ROSS EXO ADAMSPart of these dogmas of capitalism will somehow disappear. It's only recently that we've been able to say the word capitalism out loud, in public, and not necessarily get weird looks. However, I might not use the term ‘dogma’ to indicate something like a hegemonic social relation that organises other social ties. But I like your framing of capitalism and its consequences; this is in fact how we discuss it with our students. Because we are taught architects are problem solvers, it makes sense that we tend to insist on climate change, racism, poverty, etc., as ‘problems’ architecture can solve. As a result, we end up trying to solve the consequences of a large, yet unnamed, structural system — capitalism — without addressing it as the problem itself. So we teach that those aren't problems but effects — not to downgrade these issues but to shift the question and ask for their causes. This goes back to your question about the urgencies. In the past 10 or 15 years, architecture has started to reckon with the effects of liberal capitalism: we tried to solve climate change with sustainability, white male supremacy in offices with DEI3 campaigns and Title IX4 regulation, and gentrification with community-based and participatory design. These fixes often don’t address the structural relations in which architecture plays a key role, and sometimes they end up amplifying the problems they attempt to tackle.

"We end up trying to solve the consequences of a large, yet unnamed, structural system — capitalism — without addressing it as the problem itself."

- Ross Exo Adams

We have discussed at length what architecture can do to address these issues and consequently emphasise two sides of the curriculum. The first is to see architecture as a lens through which to understand the world — to develop spatial literacy. In this regard one of our core courses, developed by Betsy Clifton, is called Architecture as Translation. This course teaches students to use architectural tools of representation to translate societal concerns into expressive models. Architectural tools should be taught not only to produce new spaces but also to map systems and relationships, similar to Forensic Architecture, to reset the tools of architecture so that they can play roles in forms of advocacy, and broader forms of spatial justice. The second is insisting on architecture as a world-making practice: how we can reinstitute relations between ourselves and nature, and how architecture can, in turn, institute new ways of being human in a broader sense. Ivan Lopez-Munuera, for example, has been teaching various courses that approach architecture as a mediator of human and more-than-human ecologies. These two ways are the beginning of thinking about how architecture can more intentionally intervene in systemic matters.

SLTSOA is situated in Arizona, an urban and political landscape defined by sprawl and faced with urgent questions on the sustainability and responsible distribution of its resources. We're a small school existing in this context and trying to tackle substantial issues. We've been restructuring the first-semester studio to be about material stories and landscape — informed by the natural desert landscape of Arizona, its sustainability, and climate change in the face of desertification — and how we communicate those issues through architecture in opposition to destructive practices in the environment. We spend much of our time representing research before diving into an architectural project to understand the impact of local natural phenomena and how they have been transformed and compromised. By the second semester, students build on that knowledge within the context of sprawl in the Phoenix area, the prevalence of the single-family home, and its densification into multifamily and multigenerational typologies. We aim to challenge the norms of security and ownership toward sustainability and well-being. The interesting part of the curriculum is that students learn from their communal living situations to inform the conversations around housing and alternative typologies.

"We spend much of our time representing research before diving into an architectural project to understand the impact of local natural phenomena and how they have been transformed and compromised."

- Stephanie Lin

As a school, we are a non-profit. We currently have more faculty than students and this small scale demands creative ways of working together in order to operate successfully, which can be challenging from a financial point of view but also offers a kind of flexibility and freedom. We don’t have a lot of bureaucracy and each member of our staff fulfils a multitude of roles: the Dean and President regularly teach, for example. We also have a core Community Life curriculum requirement that supports this culture, in which students organise themselves around common activities, from organising lectures to cooking together. It’s not a typical core requirement of a master's programme and it involves the assessment of leadership, collaboration, communication, and design thinking. It encourages students to become significant voices and take ownership of their educational experience rather than take the role of consumers. Another interesting aspect of the programme is that students and some faculty also share the same housing facilities. As a result, there's a lot of cross-pollination outside the formal curriculum through a communal living environment, and we don’t have that typical distance between students and professors.


KOOZ Interestingly, your schools have many similarities but also have a structural difference: Bard is unaccredited for licensure, while TSOA is accredited. As architects, we design the built environment; how do your programmes relate to professional practice?

ISO The profession has been important for Ross and me. I wouldn’t be the same without it. I emphasise to my students that it's essential to understand one’s relationship with the profession. We have always been interested in the relationship between the profession and politics, and we ask our students to do the same and use various modes of engagement in the practice. I think NAAB is trying to have a more expansive understanding of professional practice, but it still doesn’t recognise liberal arts education or interdisciplinary approaches to architecture. Nevertheless, liberal arts education can complement the NAAB model in many ways. It helps to decenter the discipline and relate it back to public concerns. At Bard, half of the students’ time is dedicated to the disciplinary architecture curriculum, and the other half is reserved for students to explore other disciplines to give a more grounded and critical perspective. Consequently, decentering architecture involves more communication between us and the students. When they do their study plan, we encourage them to take the other 50% of courses in those related to the built environment. Ross and I read every course description that passes through Bard and cross-list those connected somehow to architecture. It’s not just a matter of giving options, but actively seeking cross-pollination between other fields and architecture. Many of our students will enter professional practice: this is the first year our students have started applying to M.Arch programmes, and we are seeing very positive results of the curriculum. But we hope they will enter practice by asking more societal-related questions, bringing in other disciplines, and expanding the practice.

"Liberal arts education can complement the NAAB model in many ways. It helps to decenter the discipline and relate it back to public concerns."

- Ivonne Santoyo-Orozco

REAOur students have a criticality about the world we admire. We're happy to know that they don't accept everything at face value, and interrogate issues that naturally spark discussions across the different disciplines.

SLWe just got our eight-year NAAB re-accreditation and our interest is in how we can provide an environment that is experimental while also being practice-oriented. We are early adopters of the NAAB 2020 conditions. NAAB was looking to the school to define how we address and assess its various criteria such as design, leadership and collaboration, and ecological knowledge. More importantly, it was an opportunity for us to reinforce how we define the uniqueness of our master’s programme at TSOA. What does learning by doing mean? What unique infrastructure do we need? What is the importance of a community life component? What is material experimentation? What is immersive learning? These questions express our identity. We received a distinction from NAAB on Leadership and Collaboration which speaks to the students’ significant voice and role in collaborating with faculty and leadership to build this latest version of the school.

"What does learning by doing mean? What is the importance of a community life component? What is material experimentation? What is immersive learning? These questions express our identity."

- Stephanie Lin

Maintaining experimentation and radicality while addressing the pragmatics of professional criteria is something within our identity. Interestingly, the school’s history was multidisciplinary. Still, today, while we're a single-department university, being small allows us to collaborate easily with other organisations and disciplines. We have done projects with the Johnny Carson Center for Emerging Media Arts at the University of Lincoln - Nebraska, in which students have worked on tiny-home designs for a community in North Carolina, which has suffered black land loss and has been navigating the legal issues to reclaim their properties. Our students developed the architectural design work, while the Carson Center students developed projects using immersive storytelling technologies.


KOOZ I agree that architecture needs interdisciplinary approaches to contribute to complex societies and environments; otherwise, it becomes a real estate commodity instead of participating in just reworlding actions.

REAIf we were to talk about interdisciplinarity 10 or 15 years ago, it would have been a conversation easily dismissed; in the US in particular, architects have for so long been obsessed with defining disciplinary boundaries. Every Log issue and every conference was about what architecture is (and thus, what it is not). Luckily, this isn’t the conversation anymore, and it signals a shift in a field that is becoming more aware of the injustices and complicities it’s entangled with, and the need to embrace other practices that may draw from or draw in other fields. The question of interdisciplinarity is crucial because we're also trying to reevaluate the field.

KOOZ Not only in the US; architectural design has been viewed as a compositional and formal process for a long time. Yet, issues of material extraction, labour, colonisation and so on are innately part of its operations, which means architecture is intimately interdisciplinary. So the question shouldn't be whether we accept interdisciplinarity, but rather how or why did we accept the idea of architecture as a self-referential discipline for so long?

SLOne of the most exciting aspects of this generation of learners is its more critical perspective of the processes we may take for granted in the profession. I did my graduate studies at Harvard GSD, where there was an emphasis on form and geometry. It’s exciting that the discourse is starting to open up to include and experiment with a multitude of approaches that ultimately aim to share what we do rather than to protect what we do. That’s becoming a common goal across many schools.

"Every faculty in the programme is energised by shifting, expanding and questioning not only the outdated canon, but how it is a reflection of a larger set of social relations."

- Ivonne Santoyo-Orozco

ISOValerio, what you're bringing up makes me think about many prominent architectural figures and discourses that, in the last decades, have dominated the field and have failed students, because the world they have been taught is not catching up with their social demands. It is refreshing to go to reviews and see that the protagonists are changing, even if certain puzzle pieces remain there. The students educated in that world you described rely on specific prominent figures and discourses that replicate that approach, always trying to design the newest, most profitable shape. As a reflection of this, one recurring thing in our conversations around the curriculum is what precedents we give to our students — against that cultural approach — and what other forms of living we can provide as examples. Our intrinsic relationship to capital has proven itself to be quite stubborn, even if there are many different ways of being that continue to exist outside of capital. My research on housing cooperatives throughout Latin America — where commodification is a site of struggle — as well as many historical examples that are still alive and have already questioned the mandates of real estate commodities, has been a useful guidance. Every faculty in the programme is energised by shifting, expanding and questioning not only the outdated canon, but how it is a reflection of a larger set of social relations. It is challenging because sometimes our students are interested in the established canon, but without negating it, we seek to situate it in the socio-political conditions of its emergence, and offer an expanded set of references.


KOOZ I’ve always been more interested in design as a collective action than the work of the single figure. It is an issue of ego, different knowledge, and debate, and as architecture addresses cohabitation, it needs to come from a collective effort. How does your pedagogy address this issue? Stephanie, I find it relevant that you all live in the same building at TSOA. Is there a specific role for tutorship?

SLTo the first question and previous points, we deal with the singular figure a lot: Frank Lloyd Wright founded the school, and consequently, we have students who enrol because they admire his work. It’s hard to avoid but we also try to put this in as much perspective as possible for the students, such that important conversations around historical contexts, contemporary works, and collaborators are also recognised. We have to examine what is valuable in the legacy and how to preserve it while maintaining the progressiveness of the programme. And to your latter question, our culture of community is part and parcel of our pedagogy. We’re distinctive and unique in that way; everyday life is very much blended with academic life to an uncommon degree, with the outcome being that students and faculty can really easily approach each other within this collaborative environment. Our studio building is a former residential building with a daily life routine incorporated into the academic schedule. It speaks to our larger ambitions of providing as many platforms for producing knowledge as possible. It's constructive for students to be able to switch between different formal and informal modes of discussion and interaction as a way of processing what they are learning.

"One of our strengths is combining pragmatic concerns with theoretical ideas and also being able to test and enact those within a communal culture."

- Stephanie Lin

All students who come to our school are self-selecting: we offer an experience that is not for everybody. One of our strengths is combining pragmatic concerns with theoretical ideas and also being able to test and enact those within a communal culture. One of our students called us a utopia, which is loaded but somehow true. We have to collaborate; there is no other way. But at the same time, we’re in an environment that fosters individuality because everyone becomes highly familiar with each other's strengths, contributions, and interests. We intentionally produce and structure our collaborations around this so that everyone has a chance to improve on something that they are uncomfortable with. Many of our collective activities are managed with a project management software called Asana because there's so much going on and a need to ensure everyone participates while guaranteeing equity among students and faculty. Another platform for this has been our thesis design-build Shelter programme. It isn't as collaborative in the initial design phase, but it becomes highly coordinated during design development and construction, and includes mentorship between student leaders and their assistants, with everyone being required to contribute. Splitting time between intellectual and manual work, or studio and building site, is mentally challenging, but it also builds adaptability and new perspectives.

"We're rethinking how to create a different pedagogy by instituting collective design processes. We want to create situations where conflicts, divisions, and debates emerge because we want students to learn to take political positions."

- Ross Exo Adams

REA I’ll push a bit against the question’s framing, insofar as it makes an opposition between the ego and collective practice. Somehow, I don’t think this opposition has the same rhetorical force it once did. Even corporate firms, including those run by figureheads, embrace a team mentality nowadays. What I think we need to ask, though, is about collective design. We’ve been trying to approach collective forms of design differently in our programme, in part by asking: is collective design enough? What should it do? At Bard, Michael Robinson Cohen has been fine-tuning a pedagogy of collective design as part of our core studio-seminar ‘Constituencies’, where students begin by critically assessing the field of ‘participatory design’ and then seek to put in practice a different approach that involves understanding grassroots organisations historically and imaging the group’s ‘potential histories’, drawing from the work of Ariella Azoulay.

The larger field of architecture has been trying to tackle questions of social justice through community-based or participatory design, which aim to expose the design process to at least a gesture of collective decision making. However, despite that everyone seems to agree that this is a positive move, these practices often cannot account for the structures that operate to divide, displace, and exploit communities. Ultimately, we're talking about a system of extracting labour power for profit, whether that's a team everyone likes or where everyone is enslaving themselves to a central figure. So, we're rethinking how to create a different pedagogy by instituting collective design processes. We want not necessarily to aim for consensus but to create situations where conflicts, divisions, and debates emerge because we want students to learn to take political positions. It's about curating a studio not to make a cool building, but to ask how a collective group makes projects with complex histories dealing with questions of real estate power, gentrification, and the role of architecture as a contested site. Architecture, understood this way, is a narrative projection of future spaces and worlds. To make conscious a collective future — thinking of designing for collective living — we should translate this question of individual vs. collective: instead of designing for a single client, what if architecture can work for a particular group of people trying to fight for housing justice?


KOOZ I agree. The team I refer to is not the flat corporate one or the one self-enslaved under the leader. It’s the place for debate because architecture is somehow always the place for cohabitation.

ISOPutting that in place through design methodologies is hard, especially if you enable debate. Recently, I went to a studio review of our architecture fellow, Stephanie Lee, and it was a wonderful experience: students created a five-foot by five-foot collective drawing to understand and represent how labour in rural spaces is distributed. Because they began to take ownership of specific positions within the rural landscape, the spaces they drew became a collective site of positive contestation. Regardless of the methodology, collective work also involves a discussion about students’ resources and institutional support: a faster or a slower computer is not a detail. Before starting the programme, Ross and I studied the design of architecture classrooms, questioning whether to use individual or collective desks. We eventually conceived of a model shaped like two concentric spaces with a row of school computers, preloaded with all the needed software, on the outside and a seminar space in the centre. We want the classroom to be a collective space for gathering. As part of a discourse on equity, Bard has been funding all supplies and materials students use. This is happening thanks to the help of our administration because the institution has to change as much as the curriculum. As we grow our student numbers, this has become more and more difficult, but we hope to continue advocating for the even access to resources among our student body.

"The collective management of resources and infrastructure among students and between students and leadership is a prominent feature within our pedagogy."

- Stephanie Lin

SLStudents at TSOA are required to contribute to weekly meetings to discuss their work, plan the week, and initiate projects or activities. The collective management of resources and infrastructure among students and between students and leadership is a prominent feature within our pedagogy. Our students have their own budget for trips, publications, and other activities. As we are still rebuilding, we also invite students to voice their needs for different types of support along the way that would help the school overall, whether it’s materials, equipment, time, or otherwise; it fosters a meaningful sense of ownership of their education. Our students are currently working on a studio project to design facilities for a future campus expansion. The brief came at their request, so we started a conversation with them to develop ideas for the syllabus, drawing from a previous strategic planning session with students regarding the vision of TSOA in light of the recent challenges and transitions. It has also been exciting to be in conversation with other schools and educators interested in this model and to think about how our pedagogy today can be better supported, structured, and relevant in the future.


KOOZ I have one last question. Architecture and pedagogy are two political disciplines, and I have always been interested in the intersection between theory and practice. Are your schools connected with the territory they are based on and the local communities? What is your political agenda?

ISORoss and I think a lot through political education. Architecture is political. Whether you want to admit it or not, it’s just a matter of analysing and understanding its history and relationship to social struggle. Whether you take a position or not, architecture doesn't stop being political.

KOOZ It also constantly perpetuates or subverts the established conditions; it cannot be neutral.

ISOAbsolutely. So, how do we teach students to understand the political agency of architecture? How do we help shape a spatial, collective consciousness? We are inspired by people like Paulo Freire and bell hooks, who, for a very long time, have asked students to consider structural issues, the roots of the conditions of the oppressed. It’s the same for architecture. Think about housing cooperatives: if there's no political education, it is hard to sustain, in the long term, certain alternative models to private property — if there's no understanding of the reasons for the project itself. Especially with the architecture fellowship programme, we're interested in engaging with real societal questions — as in the case of Stephanie Lee, whose research on BIPOC farms in the Hudson Valley activates students to engage in these broader systems. We are interested not simply in our students visiting sites, but in directing them to engage in their historical, environmental, and socio-political realities. Once this is established, we let their interventions evolve as the context calls, using architectural tools not only to propose new interventions but to produce acts of reworlding through pedagogy, storytelling, fiction, and potential histories. One of the benefits of not being accredited allows us the flexibility to resist the constant anxiety for design innovation. Sometimes, the best result for meaningful socio-political impact is, for example, documentation and not intervention. Our aim is to develop a collective consciousness around space.

"How do we teach students to understand the political agency of architecture? How do we help shape a spatial, collective consciousness?"

- Ivonne Santoyo-Orozco

SLWe have a more project-focused response to this question. Our school has been moving around, and engaging local communities has been an ever-evolving process because those communities have changed several times. We learned much from building at Arcosanti as a testing ground for what we would do in a city environment and we are happy to continue this nature of interaction at Cattle Track. At the moment, we've been connecting student projects to organisations that are aligned with our values. One is called Brick by Brick5 — it has since been restructured — which produces compressed earth blocks as a construction material for housing the unhoused population. One of our students was working closely with them on their thesis project prototyping transitional housing. Finding opportunities for our students to respond in real-time to real-world problems within their limited capacity, while also being compatible with the timelines of our semester system, is challenging, but it’s a significant gain for the students and the faculty when it works. We also try to find ways to work beyond the typical structures and timelines of higher education to create continuities of discourse which is also challenging. As another example, we produced three exhibitions in one semester around the arts and climate change in collaboration with a local curator. Organising and enacting all the practical considerations that go into translating a theoretical idea into something real, like acting as a general contractor — which is not what architecture students usually do — develops a great awareness of design processes and logistics, and the ability to creatively invent alternative modes of practice within that. Our curriculum, being more intertwined with the constraints of professional practice, starts from there.


Ross Exo Adams is Assistant Professor and Co-Director of Architecture at Bard College. He is the author of Circulation and Urbanization (Sage, 2018). His research works at the intersections of architectural and urban histories with political geography and environmental humanities, posing questions about how practices of design produce and reproduce systems of power in space. His current project charts the legacies of settler colonial modes of spatial production in modern and contemporary urbanization.

Stephanie Lin is a Canadian designer and educator. She is the Dean of The School of Architecture (TSOA), now located at Cattle Track Arts Compound in Arizona, and the founder of Present Forms in Brooklyn, New York. She was recently named the recipient of the 2023 AIA AZ Design Pedagogy Award for her teaching work at TSOA. Previously, she taught at The Cooper Union School of Architecture, UC Berkeley, Pratt Institute, and Columbia University GSAPP. Lin’s design practice combines artistic and architectural modes of thinking, using ephemeral materialities to uncover embedded cultural narratives and hidden orders. Her work has been exhibited internationally, including at The Museum of Modern Art, Storefront for Art and Architecture, The National Academy of Design, The Elizabeth Foundation for the Arts, A+D Architecture and Design Museum, cneai=, Forum Stadtpark, and several universities. Lin received her B.A. in Architecture from UC Berkeley and her M.Arch I AP from Harvard GSD.

Ivonne Santoyo-Orozco is an architectural historian and educator whose work looks at Latin American histories of housing rights and social movements against private property. She holds a PhD from the Architectural Association, an MArch from the Berlage Institute and a BArch from Universidad de las Américas Puebla. As an architect, she has collaborated with Arup Integrated Urbanism, Foster + Partners, Wiel Arets, and Fernando Romero. As an educator, she has taught at the Architectural Association School of Architecture, Iowa State University’s College of Design, University for the Creative Arts in Canterbury, and Central Saint Martin’s College of Art and Design in London. Currently, she co-directs the Architecture program at Bard College.

Valerio Franzone is the Managing Editor at KoozArch. He is a Ph.D. Architect (Università IUAV di Venezia), and his work focuses on the relationships between architecture, humanity, and nature, investigating architecture’s role, limits, and potential to explore new typologies and strategies. A founding partner of 2A+P and 2A+P Architettura, he later established Valerio Franzone Architect and OCHAP | Office for Cohabitation Processes. His projects have been awarded in international competitions and shown in several exhibitions, such as the 7th, 11th, and 14th International Architecture Exhibition - La Biennale di Venezia. His projects and texts appear in magazines such as Domus, A10, Abitare, Volume, and AD Architectural Design.


1 National Architectural Accrediting Board
2 Bard Prison Initiative is an educational platform for college education for prisoners.
3 Diversity, equity and inclusion.
4 [online]
5 [online]

03 Jun 2024
Reading time
20 minutes
Related Articles by topic Pedagogy
Related Articles by topic Politics