This article analyzes the results of a survey of planning theory course outlines conducted in 2009 parallel to three similar surveys that together provide a thirty-year review of a central component of planning education. The article begins by briefly reviewing the major intellectual developments that occurred in planning theory over the past thirty years. It then examines the course topics and required readings, authors, and texts for forty-eight master’s-level courses offered during the 2009-2010 academic year. The article concludes by evaluating the survey findings and the picture they paint of contemporary planning theory education.
AlexanderE. R.1984. After rationality, what? A review of responses to paradigm breakdown. Journal of the American Planning Association50:60-69.
2.
AlexanderE. R.1986. Approaches to planning. New York: Gordon Breach.
3.
AltshulerA. A.1965. The goals of comprehensive planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planning31:186-94.
4.
American Institute of Certified Planners. AICP Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. American Instiute of Certified Planning 2005.
5.
ArnsteinS. R.1969. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planning35:387-94.
6.
BanfieldE. C.1955. Supplement: Note on a conceptual scheme. In Politics, planning and the public interest, ed. MeyersonM.BanfieldE. C.. New York: Free Press.
7.
BanfieldE. C.1959. Ends and means in planning. International Social Science Journal11:361-68.
8.
BarrettC. D.2001. Everyday ethics for practicing planners. Washington, DC: American Institute of Certified Planners.
9.
BaumH. S.1996. Why the rational paradigm persists: Tales from the field. Journal of Planning Education and Research15:127-35.
10.
BeauregardR. A.1995. Edge critics. Journal of Planning Education and Research14:163-66.
11.
BeauregardR. A.2003. Between modernity and postmodernity: The ambiguous position of U.S. planning. In Readings in planning theory, 2nd ed., ed. CampbellS.FainsteinS. S.. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Original edition, BeauregardR. A.1989. Between modernity and postmodernity: The ambiguous position of U.S. planning. Environment and Planning D: Soceity and Space7:381-95.
12.
BeckmanN.1964. The planner as a bureaucrat. Journal of the American Institute of Planners30 (4): 323-27.
13.
BlackA.1968. The comprehensive plan. In Principles and practices of urban planning, ed. GoodmanW. I.FreundE. C.. Washington, DC: International City Managers Association.
14.
BolanR. S.1967. Emerging view of planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners33 (4): 233-45.
15.
BolanR. S.1980. The practitioner as theorist: The phenomenolgy of the professional episode. Journal of the American Planning Association46:261-74.
16.
BolanR. S.1981. Do planning theory courses teach planning?Journal of Planning Education and Research1 (1): 12-16.
17.
BranchM. C.1983. Comprehensive planning: General theories and principles. Los Angeles, CA: Palisades.
18.
BrooksM. P.2002. Planning theory for practitioners. Chicago: Planners Press.
19.
BrysonJohn M.EinsweilerRobert C.. 1987. Symposium on strategic planning. Journal of the American Planning Association53:6-69.
CampbellS.FainsteinS. S.. 2003b. Introduction: The structure and debates of planning theory. In Readings in planning theory, 2nd ed., ed. CampbellS.FainsteinS. S.. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
23.
CheckowayB., ed. 1994. Paul Davidoff and advocacy planning in retrospect. Journal of the American Planning Association60:139-43.
24.
DaltonL. C.1986. Why the rational paradigm persists: The resistance of professional education and practice to alternative forms of planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research5:147-53.
25.
DavidoffP.2003. Advocacy and pluralism in planning. In Readings in planning theory, 2nd ed., ed. CampbellS.FainsteinS. S.. Malden MA: Blackwell. Original edition, DavidoffP.1965. Advocacy and pluralism in planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners31:331-38.
26.
DavidoffP.ReinerT. A.. 1962. A choice theory of planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners28 (2): 103-15.
27.
de NeufvilleJ. I.1983. Planning theory and pracitce: Bridging the gap. Journal of Planning Education and Research3:35-45.
28.
EtzioniA.1967. Mixed scanning: A “third” approach to decision making. Public Administration Review27:385-92.
29.
FainsteinS. S.2003. New directions in planning theory. In Readings in planning theory, 2nd ed., ed. CampbellS.FainsteinS. S.. Oxford UK: Blackwell. Original edition, FainsteinS. S.2000. New directions in planning theory. Urban Affairs Review35 (4): 451-78.
30.
FaludiAndreas, ed. 1973. A reader in planning theory. New York: Pergamon.
31.
FisherF.ForesterJ., eds. 1993. The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
32.
FisherR.UryW.. 1981. Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. New York: Penguin Books.
33.
FishmanR.2003. Urban utopias: Ebenezer Howard, Frank Lloyd Wright and Le Corbusier. In Readings in planning theory, ed. CampbellS.FainsteinS. S.. Cambridge: Blackwell. Original edition, FishmanR., ed. 1977. Urban utopias in the twentieth century: Ebenezer Howard, Frank Lloyd Wright, and Le Corbusier. New York: Basic Books.
34.
FlyvbjergB.1998. Rationality and power: Democracy in practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
35.
FoglesongR. E.2003. Planning the capitalist city. In Readings in planning theory, 2nd ed., ed. CampbellS.FainsteinS. S.. Cambridge: Blackwell. Original edition, Extract fromFoglesongR. E.. 1986. Planning the capitalist city. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
36.
ForesterJ.1980. Critical theory and planning practice. Journal of the American Planning Association46:275-86.
37.
ForesterJ.1983. Planning in the face of power. Journal of the American Planning Association48:67-80.
38.
ForesterJ.1989. Planning in the face of power. Berkeley: University of California Press.
39.
FrankN.2002. Rethinking planning theory for a master’s level course. Journal of Planning Education and Research21:320-30.
40.
FriedmannJ.1969. Notes on societal action. Journal of the American Institute of Planners35 (5): 311-18.
41.
FriedmannJ.1987. Planning in the public domain: From knowledge to action. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
42.
FriedmannJ.1995. Teaching planning theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research14:156-62.
43.
FriedmannJ.1996. Two centuries of planning theory: An overview. In Explorations in planning theory, ed. MandelbaumgS. J.MazzaL.BurchellR. W.. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research.
44.
FriedmannJ.2008. The uses of planning theory: A bibliographic essay. Journal of Planning Education and Research28 (2): 247-57.
45.
FriedmannJ.HudsonB.. 1974. Knowledge and action: A guide to planning theory. Journal of the American Institute of Planners40 (1): 3-16.
46.
FriendJ.HicklingA.. 2005. Planning under pressure: The strategic choice approach. 3rd ed.Burlington, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
47.
GansH. J.1968. City planning in America, 1890-1968: A sociological analysis. In Essays on urban problems and solutions: People and plans, ed. GansH. J.. New York: Basic Books.
48.
HallP.1988. Cities of tomorrow: An intellectual history of urban planning and design in the twentieth century. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
49.
HallP.2002. Cities of tomorrow: An intellectual history of urban planning and design in the twentieth century. 3rd ed.Malden, MA: Blackwell.
50.
HarveyD.1996. On planning the ideology of planning. In Readings in planning theory, ed. CampbellS.FainsteinS. S.. Cambridge: Blackwell. Original edition, HarveyD.. 1985. The urbanization of capital. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.
51.
HealeyP.1992. Planning through debate: The communicative turn in planning theory. Town Planning Review63 (2): 143-62.
52.
HealeyP.2003. The communicative turn in planning theory and its implications for spatial strategy formation. In Readings in planning theory, 2nd ed., ed. CampbellS.FainsteinS. S.. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Original edition, PatseyH.1996. The communicative turn in planning theory and its implications for spatial strategy formation. Environment and Planning, B: Planning and Design23 (2): 217-34.
53.
HemmensG.1980. New directions in planning theory. Journal of the American Planning Association46:259-60.
54.
HendlerS., ed. 1995. Planning ethics: A reader in planning theory, practice and education. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University, Center for Urban Policy Research.
55.
HightowerH. C.1969. Planning theory in contemporary planning education. Journal of the American Institute of Planners35:326-29.
56.
HochC.1994. What do planners do: Power, politics and persuasion. Chicago: APA Press.
57.
HopkinsL. D.2001. Urban development: The logic of making plans. Washington, DC: Island Press.
58.
HopkinsL. D.AlexanderE. R.. 2009. Introduction to symposium: Planning in complex multiorganizational systems. Journal of Planning Education and Research28 (4): 470-76.
59.
HoweE.1994. Acting on ethics in planning. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research.
60.
HoweE.KaufmanJ.. 1979. The ethics of contemporary American planners. Journal of the American Planning Association45 (3): 243-55.
61.
InnesJ. E.1995. Planning theory’s emerging paradigm: Communicative action and interactive practice. Journal of Planning Education and Research14:183-89.
62.
InnesJ. E.1996. Planning through consensus building: A new view of the comprehensive planning ideal. Journal of the American Planning Association62 (4): 460-72.
63.
IssermanA. M.1985. Dare to plan: As essay on the role of the future in planning practice and education. Town Planning Review36 (4): 483-91.
64.
JacobsJ.2003. The death and life great American cities. In Readings in planning theory, 2nd ed., ed. CampbellS.FainsteinS. S.. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Original edition, JacobsJ.. 1961. The death and life of great American cities. New York: Random House.
65.
KellyE. D.BeckerB.. 2000. An introduction to the comprehensive plan. Washington, DC: Island Press.
66.
KlostermanR. E.1981. Contemporary planning theory education: Results of a course survey. Journal of Planning Education and Research1 (1): 1-11.
67.
KlostermanR. E.1992. Planning theory education in the 1980s: Results of a second course survey. Journal of Planning Education and Research11:130-40.
68.
KlostermanR. E.2000. Planning theory education in the 1990s: Results of a course survey. Atlanta, GA: Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning.
69.
KlostermanR. E.2003. Arguments for and against planning. In Readings in planning theory, 2nd ed., ed. CampbellS.FainsteinS. S.. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Original edition, KlostermanR. E.1985. Arguments for and against planning. Town Planning Review56 (1): 5-20.
70.
KrueckebergD. A., ed. 1983. Introduction to planning history in the United States. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University, Center for Urban Policy Research.
71.
KrumholzN.1996. A retrospective view of equity planning: Cleveland 1969-1979. In Readings in planning theory, ed. CampbellS.FainsteinS. S.. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Original edition, KrumholzN.1982. A retrospective view of equity planning: Cleveland, 1969-1979. Journal of the American Planning Association48:163-74.
72.
LauuriaM.2000. The limits to communicative planning theory: An introduction. Journal of Planning Education and Research19:331-32.
LimG. C.1986. Toward a synthesis of planning theories. Journal of Planning Education and Research5:75-85.
75.
LindblomC. E.2003. The science of “muddling through.” In Readings in planning theory, 2nd ed., ed. CampbellS.FainsteinS. S.. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Original edition, LindblomC. E.1959. The science of “muddling through.”Public Administration Review19:79-88.
76.
LucyW. H.1988. Close to power: Setting priorities with elected officials. Chicago: Planners Press.
77.
MandelbaumS. J.MazzaL.BurchellR. W., eds. 1996. Explorations in planning theory. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research.
78.
MarcuseP.1976. Professional ethics and beyond. Journal of the American Institute of Planners42:264-74.
79.
MeyersonM.1956. Building the middle-range bridge for comprehensive planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners22:58-64.
80.
MierR.1994. Some observations on race in planning. Journal of the American Planning Association60 (2): 235-40.
81.
MilroyB. M.1991. Symposium: Into postmodern weightlessness. Journal of Planning Education and Research10:181-87.
82.
MyersD.2001. Symposium: Putting the future in planning, Introduction. Journal of the American Planning Association67 (4): 365-67.
83.
MyersD.2007. Promoting the community future in the contest with present individualism. In Engaging the future: Forecasts, scenarios, plans, and projects, ed. HopkinsL. D.ZapataM.. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
84.
NeumanM.2000. Communicate this! Does consensus lead to advocacy and pluralism?Journal of Planning Education and Research19 (4): 343-50.
85.
PeattieL. R.1968. Reflections on advocacy planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners34 (2): 80-88.
86.
SagerT.2002. Deliberative planning and decision making: An impossibility result. Journal of Planning Education and Research23 (4): 367-78.
87.
SandercockL.1998. Towards cosmopolis: Planning for multi-cultural cities. New York: John Wiley.
88.
SandercockL.ForsythA.. 1992. A gender agenda: New directions for planning theory. Journal of the American Planning Association58:49-59.
89.
SchonD.1983. The reflective practitioner: How professional think in action. New York: Basic Books.
90.
StiftelB.1995. Symposium: Teaching planning theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research14:155-89.
91.
SusskindL.OzawaC.. 1984. Mediated negotiation in the public sector: The planner as negotiator. Journal of Planning Education and Research4:5-15.
92.
TaylorN.1998. Urban planning theory since 1945. London: Sage.
93.
ThomasJ. M.1994. Planning history and the black urban experience: Linkages and contemporary implications. Journal of Planning Education and Research14 (1): 1-11.
94.
ThrogmortonJ. A.1996. Planning as persuasive storytelling: The rhetorical construction of Chicago’s electric future. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
95.
WachsM, ed. 1985. Ethics in planning. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research.
96.
WatsonV.2002. Do we learn from planning practice? The contribution of the practice movement to planning theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research22:178-87.
97.
WilsonR. W.PayneM.SmithE.. 2003. Does discussion enhance rationality?Journal of Planning Education and Research69 (4): 354-58.
98.
YiftachelO.1999. Planning theory at a crossroad: The third Oxford conference. Journal of Planning Education and Research18:267-70.
