Results are presented from a survey of North American graduate plan ning programs to assess curricular specialization in land use planning. Documentation studied included cat alogs, program descriptions, and syl labi for courses identified as part of a land use specialization. Of the sample of fifty-seven schools, 65% have declared such a specialization, with a mean of ten land use-related courses offered. A typology of course types emerged, as a basis for summarizing the survey data and comparing the programs. The survey is presented as one source of evi dence useful in designing appropri ate subcurricula in land use, along with information about current professional practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alexander, E.1986. What is plan implementation and how is it taught?Journal of Planning Education and Research5(2):107-118.
2.
Brooks, M. P.; McDonough, M. B.; Sanders, H. A.; and Winter, M. A., eds. 1976 . The ACSP-ASPO Guide to Graduate Education in Urban and Regional Planning.Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials.
3.
Chapin, F.S., and Kaiser, E.J.1979. Urban Land Use Planning, 3rded. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
4.
Knack, R.E.1986. Who's a planner? And what is he or she?Planning52(3):9-15.
5.
Patton, C. V, and Reed, K., eds. 1986. Guide to Graduate Education in Urban and Regional Planning.Milwaukee: Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning.
6.
Pivo, G.1989. Specializations, faculty interest, and courses in physical planning subjects at graduate planning schoolsJournal of Planning Education and Research9(1):19-27.
7.
Sawicki, D.1988. Planning education and planning practice: Can we plan for the next decade?Journal of Planning Education and Research7(2):115-120.
