Bridging academia and practice: Evolving pedagogies in urban design education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47818/DRArch.2025.v6si193Keywords:
urban design pedagogy, urban design professional practice, urban design academic council, qualitative interviews, academia and practiceAbstract
Urban design education is confronting growing pressures to respond to increasingly complex urban, environmental, and socio-political challenges while remaining relevant to professional practice. This paper presents findings from a qualitative, interview-based study conducted by the Urban Design Academic Council (UDAC) between 2023 and 2025, drawing on semi-structured conversations with fourteen urban design practices operating across diverse institutional and geographic contexts in the United States. Rather than offering a comprehensive literature review of urban design pedagogy, the paper foregrounds practitioner perspectives as an empirical and practice-informed contribution to ongoing disciplinary discussions. The interviews examine professional expectations of urban design education, including desired skills, perceived gaps in graduate preparedness, emerging trends in practice, and opportunities for deeper collaboration between academia and the profession. Findings reveal consistent emphasis on strategic and systemic thinking, narrative and communicative competence, interdisciplinary fluency, and preparedness to engage climate resilience, equity, and infrastructural complexity at multiple scales. Practitioners also highlight the value of pedagogical models that integrate experiential learning, joint research initiatives, and sustained professional engagement within academic settings. By documenting and synthesizing practitioner insights, this study contributes a field-level snapshot of current professional priorities and challenges in urban design. The paper positions interview-based inquiry as both a research method and a pedagogical tool, offering an empirical foundation for future curriculum development, mixed-methods research, and cross-institutional collaboration aimed at strengthening the alignment between urban design education and contemporary practice.
Downloads
References
Carmona, M. (2019). Design and the place-responsive city. Journal of Urban Design, 24(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2018.1509970
Carmona, M., de Magalhães, C., & Hammond, L. (2008). Public space: The management dimension. Routledge.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage.
Groat, L., & Wang, D. (2013). Architectural research methods (2nd ed.). Wiley.
Loukaitou-Sideris, A., & Mukhija, V. (2016). Responding to informality through urban design studio pedagogy. Journal of Urban Design, 21(5), 577-595. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2015.1071650
Urban Design Academic Council. (2025). Mission. UDAC. https://www.udacouncil.org/mission
Salama, A. M. (2015). Spatial design education: New directions for pedagogy in architecture and beyond. Springer.
Savage, S. (2005). Urban design education: Learning for life in practice. Urban Design International, 10(1), 3-10. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.udi.9000130
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Mona El Khafif, Nico Larco

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


