The long-neglected task of defining the discipline of planning, describing the multiplicity of influences impinging upon it and unravelling the complementary (and even contradictory) discourses constituting it probably means probing the core of planning practice and revisiting planning education itself (Davoudi & Pendlebury, 2010; Goldstein & Carmin, 2006). According to Davoudi and Pendlebury, “Although planning has evolved into a distinct discipline in institutional terms, its intellectual underpinning has remained ill-defined”. Moreover, “periodic changes to planning education have neglected the epistemic aspects of the discipline” (Davoudi & Pendlebury, 2010: 613).
Reference:
Tasan-Kok, T. et al. 2018. Mismatch between planning education and practice: contemporary educational challenges and conflicts confronting young planners. From Student to Urban Planner: Young Practitioners' Reflections on Contemporary Ethical Challenges, pp. 15-32
Tasan-Kok, T., Babalik-Sutcliffe, E., Van Huyssteen, E., & Oranje, M. (2018). Mismatch between planning education and practice: Contemporary educational challenges and conflicts confronting young planners., Worklist;20185 Taylor & Francis. http://hdl.handle.net/10204/10086
Tasan-Kok, T, E Babalik-Sutcliffe, Elsona Van Huyssteen, and M Oranje. "Mismatch between planning education and practice: contemporary educational challenges and conflicts confronting young planners" In WORKLIST;20185, n.p.: Taylor & Francis. 2018. http://hdl.handle.net/10204/10086.
Tasan-Kok T, Babalik-Sutcliffe E, Van Huyssteen E, Oranje M. Mismatch between planning education and practice: contemporary educational challenges and conflicts confronting young planners.. Worklist;20185. [place unknown]: Taylor & Francis; 2018. [cited yyyy month dd]. http://hdl.handle.net/10204/10086.
Copyright: 2018 Taylor & Francis. Due to copyright restrictions, the attached PDF file only contains the abstract of the full text item. For access to the full text item, please consult the publisher's website.
ResearchSpace
