Author
Abstract
This paper explores the evolution of teaching methods in urban design education within the context of Australia's postgraduate programs. Utilizing phenomenography—a qualitative research methodology grounded in educational science—it is organized into three main sections. The first section delves into the multifaceted drivers of curricular transformation in urban design, encompassing the effects of managerialism, the prevalence of neoliberal ideologies, and the persistent identity crisis facing the field. The second section presents a detailed case study of a particular graduate program, emphasizing its contribution to the discussion of theories of learning and teaching in urban design pedagogy. By analyzing the former Master of Urban Development and Design (MUDD) curriculum at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) Sydney, the final section synthesizes the insights garnered from the structure of the MUDD program, proposing that these can inform refining and enhancing the quality of future Urban Design program models. The MUDD program exemplifies the adoption of transdisciplinary methods and teaching, learning and curricula theories in urban design education, while underscoring the urgent need for improved pedagogical training for faculty. This article not only documents these shifts but also serves as a time capsule, preserving the structure of a distinguished Urban Design curriculum during a tumultuous period in higher education worldwide. Our research identifies three key findings: first, Urban Design Studios (UDS) often operate in disciplinary silos that inhibit the integration of urban systems. Second, although there is some support for transdisciplinary methods, practitioners' understanding of UDS pedagogy remains limited. Third, there is a critical need for educational science training for higher education instructors within the Australian Higher Education Institutional context. These insights underscore the urgency of adopting transdisciplinary approaches in urban design education, with implications for policy development and enhanced educational outcomes within the Built Environment field.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:etk:drarch:v:6:y:2025:i:special-issue:id:340. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Dr. Havva Alkan Bala, Çukurova University Faculty of Architecture (Çukurova University Faculty of Communication 3rd floor) Saricam / Adana, Türkiye (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://drarch.org/index.php/drarch .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.