Abstract Transport planning professionals, upon commencing practice, are expected to be well-equipped with the knowledge and skills to address new and emerging urban transport challenges as well as to support the changing mobility and accessibility needs of communities. Because of this, the higher education sector is experiencing stronger pressure from industry, government and the public to demonstrate its ability to educate more work-ready graduates, including planning for transport. This research examines the education of transport planning professionals in the Australian context, examining to what extent students are being prepared to enhance their skills that would make them more competitive in the workplace. This research investigates the theory to practice nexus using a survey-based research design administered to transport planning educators and students. It examines the strategies and approaches employed by educators in higher education institutions to address the needs of industry and elicits perception of students within a single institution to examine what they perceive enhances their engagement and learning in taught transport planning course offerings. Results show that students favor activities that offer experiential education, and subsequently, learning. Moreover, while considered as relatively challenging, group work assessment was considered as an important exercise that simulated the workplace setting, engaged student in participatory transport planning process, and created a platform where students were able to bring in a number of key considerations into planning concerns, and overall, allowed them (students) to bridge the gap between theory and practice. The study significantly contributes in enhancing transportation planning pedagogy and informing overall practice in Australia and beyond.
[1]
John Gaber.
Simulating Planning
,
2007
.
[2]
Zenia Kotval.
Teaching Experiential Learning in the Urban Planning Curriculum
,
2003
.
[3]
P. Hudson.
Informing future learning designs in preservice teacher education through quantitative research: A primary science example
,
2012
.
[4]
M. Arefi,et al.
Journal of Planning Education and Research Reflections on the Pedagogy of Place in Planning and Urban Design on Behalf Of: Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning
,
2022
.
[5]
Karin Axelsson,et al.
Project-based Learning : - An Emergent Framework for Designing Courses
,
2006
.
[6]
Geoff Rose.
Simulated consulting: A win-win experience in transport engineering education
,
2000
.
[7]
Susan Handy,et al.
Education of Transportation Planning Professionals
,
2002
.
[8]
Anthony Williams,et al.
Aligning Assessment with Learning and Teaching
,
2007
.
[9]
John Friedmann,et al.
Teaching Planning Theory
,
1995
.
[10]
Matthew Ian Burke,et al.
Improving Student Learning in Transport and Land Use Planning in Australia and in China: theory, concepts and ways forward
,
2013
.
[11]
John Friedmann,et al.
The Uses of Planning Theory
,
2008
.
[12]
Richard E. Klosterman,et al.
Planning Theory Education
,
2011
.
[13]
E. R. Alexander,et al.
Introduction: Does planning theory affect practice, and if so, how?
,
2010
.
[14]
Scott Bennett,et al.
First Questions for Designing Higher Education Learning Spaces.
,
2007
.
[15]
Ethan Seltzer,et al.
Taking Our Bearings: Mapping a Relationship Among Planning Practice, Theory, and Education
,
1999
.
[16]
D. Boud,et al.
Assessment 2020. Seven propositions for assessment reform in higher education
,
2010
.