Abstract
The UK’s Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) has celebrated its centenary in 2014, marking 100 years of close relationships between university-based planning schools and a professional body focused on planning practice. During this period, the context for university education and the very idea of planning have changed dramatically contributing to a continual renegotiation of the relationships between the planning profession and the educational institutions it accredits. These changes have been particularly pronounced in the last 10 years where a number of factors have forced a rapid change in the nature of planning education in the UK. This has included a boom and then slump in the number of planning students linked to the dynamics of national economic situation, a reorganization of many planning school curricula, and their merger with cognate disciplines such as geography and an increased focus on research output, rather than professional engagement as the key indicator of institutional success. This last factor adds a particularly new dimension to the profession-university relationship, which could potentially lead to either straining of tensions or a synergy through research-led teaching that could significantly benefit both. This chapter will briefly review the evolution of UK planning schools and of the main ideas informing planning education. It will then describe the current profile of UK planning schools, based on an extensive national survey conducted on behalf of the Royal Town Planning Institute. The paper will then critically review the main challenges and opportunities facing UK planning schools in the context of changes in both planning practice and higher education. It will then move on to the concept of research-led teaching, drawing on current practice in the UK and review how well this concept serves students and the idea of developing reflective planning practitioners. Finally, the paper will seek to draw broad lessons from the experience of the UK and reflect on the type of planning education that can best serve planning professions in a variety of international contexts in the future.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Addie, J. P. D., Keil, R., & Olds, K. (2014). Beyond town and gown: Universities, territoriality and the mobilization of New Urban Structures in Canada. Territory, Politics, Governance, Territory, 3(1), 27–50.
Brew, A. (2010). Imperatives and challenges in integrating teaching and research. Higher Education Research and Development, 29(2), 139–150.
Campbell, H. (2005). Reflexivity and the planning academic: Challenges and responsibilities. Planning Theory and Practice, 6(2), 235–237.
Cherry, G. (1974). The evolution of British Town Planning. Leonard Hill: Leighton Buzzard.
Cockburn, C. (1970). The provision of planning education. Bristol: Centre for Environmental Studies.
Dalton, L. C. (2001). Weaving the fabric of planning as education. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 20(4), 423–436.
Dalton, L. C. (2007). Preparing planners for the breadth of practice. Journal of the American Planning Association, 73(1), 35–48.
Davoudi, S., & Pendlebury, J. (2010). Centenary paper: The evolution of planning as an academic discipline. Town Planning Review, 81(6), 613–646.
Durning, B. (2010). Planning academics and planning practitioners: Two tribes or a community of practice? Planning Practice and Research, 19(4), 435–446.
Ellis, G., Murtagh, B., & Copeland, L. (2010). The Future of the Planning Academy, London: RTPI. http://www.rtpi.org.uk/briefing-room/news-releases/2011/january/rtpi-report-highlights-importance-of-links-between-planning,-education,-research-and-practice/
Evans, B. (1993). Why we no longer need a planning profession. Planning Practice and Research, 8(1), 9–15.
Evans, B., & Rydin, Y. (1997). Planning, professionalism and sustainability. In B. Evans & A. Blowers (Eds.), Town planning into the 21st Century. London: Routledge.
Frank, A. I. (2006). Three decades of thought on planning education. Journal of Planning Literature, 21(1), 15–67.
Goodstadt, V. (2005). Rebuilding the planning community: questioning the orthodoxy and speaking the truth. Planning Theory and Practice, 6(2), 247–249.
Grant, M. (1999). Planning as a learned profession. London: A paper prepared for the Royal Town Planning Institute.
Griffiths, R. (2004). Knowledge production and the research–teaching nexus: The case of the built environment disciplines. Studies in Higher Education, 29(6), 709–726.
Gurran, N., Norman, B., & Gleeson, B. (2008). Planning Education Discussion Paper, a paper prepared for the Planning Institute of Australia, PIA.
Hague, C. (1976). A Materialist Analysis of Planning Education, a paper prepared for the EPA Planning Workshop, Unpublished.
Haughton, G., Deas, I., & Hincks, S. (2015). Making an impact: when agglomeration boosterism meets anti-planning rhetoric. Environment and Planning A, 46(2), 265–270.
Healey, P. (1983). ‘British Planning Education in the 1970s and 1980s’. In H. W. E. Davies, & P. Healey (Eds.), British planning practice and planning education in the 1970s and 1980s, Working Paper No. 70. Oxford: Oxford Polytechnic Department of Town Planning.
Healey, P. (1985). The professionalization of planning in Britain, its form and consequences. Town Planning Review, 56(4), 492–507.
Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching: exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquiry-based learning. In R. Barnett (Ed.), Reshaping the University: New relationships between research, scholarship and teaching (pp. 67–78). London: McGraw Hill and Open University Press.
Judge, E., & Haughton, G. (1998). The UK research assessment exercise and planning: The promotion of irrelevance to the Real World? Planning Practice and Research, 13(1), 9–12.
Kitchen, T. (1997). People, Politics, Policies and Plans: The City Planning Process in Contemporary Britain. London: Sage.
Marx, G., & Feathers, H. (2014). Making an impact: Misreading, misunderstanding, and misrepresenting research does nothing to improve the quality of public debate and policy making. Environment and Planning A, 46, 2276–2282.
Ozawa, C. P., & Seltzer, E. (1999). Taking Our Bearings: Mapping a Relationship Among Planning Practice, Theory, and Education. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 18(3), 257–266.
Poxon, J. (2001). Shaping the planning profession of the future; the role of planning education. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 28, 563–580.
Punter, J., & Campbell, H. (2009). Reflections on the 2008 United Kingdom research assessment exercise for town and country planning and closely associated disciplines. Town Planning Review, 80(1), 31–54.
Reade, E. (1987). British Town and country planning. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Royal Town Planning Institute. (2001). A new vision for planning. London: RTPI.
Royal Town Planning Institute. (2003). Report of the education commission. London: RTPI.
Schmidt, H. G., Rotgans, J. I., & Yew, E. H. (2011). The process of problem-based learning: what works and why. Medical Education, 45(8), 792–806.
Schuster, G. (1950). Report of the committee on qualifications of planners, CMD 8059. London: HMSO.
Seymour, E., Hunter, A. B., Laursen, S. L., & DeAntoni, T. (2004). Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: First findings from a three-year study. Science Education, 88(4), 493–534.
Spronken-Smith, R., & Walker, R. (2010). Can inquiry-based learning strengthen the links between teaching and disciplinary research? Studies in Higher Education, 35(6), 723–740.
Thomas, A. H. (1979). An Analysis of Changes in Planning Education, Unpublished M. Phil Thesis. London: University College London.
Thomas, H. (2005). Pressures, Purpose and collegiality in UK planning education. Planning Theory and Practice, 6(2), 238–247.
Thomas, A. H., & Thomas, W. K. (1981). Planning Education in the 1970s, Working Paper No. 65. Oxford: Department of Town Planning, Oxford Polytechnic.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ellis, G., Murtagh, B., Copeland, L. (2016). The Changing Context for Planning Education in the UK and the Prospects for Research-Led, Practice-Engaged Teaching. In: Kumar, A., Meshram, D., Gowda, K. (eds) Urban and Regional Planning Education . Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0608-1_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0608-1_20
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-0607-4
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-0608-1
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)