Practitioner Educators in Planning Education

1. Practitioner Educators in Planning Education ACSP Leadership Conference 2011 Gary Hack University of Pennsylvania

2. Titles Used for Practitioner Educator Faculty Adjunct Faculty/Lecturer/Assist/Assoc/Senior/Professor (49) Lecturer /Senior Lecturer (35) Visiting Lecturer/Assoc/Research/Professor (14) Professor of Practice / Distinguished Practice Professor (14) Instructor / Senior Instructor (9) Principal /Research Scientist/Research Associate (6) Senior Planner / Planner in Residence (2) Also: Affiliated Faculty, Clinical Professor, Adjunct Clinical Professor, Faculty Fellow, Senior Fellow, Faculty Associate, Consultant, Specialist Source: ACSP Guide to Undergraduate and Graduate Education in Urban and Regional Planning, 2010, Faculty lists for 99 programs.

3. Survey of PAB Accredited Planning Programs Practitioner Educators (P-E) are defined as “people who spend half or more of their (actual) working time in practice, which includes preparing plans, overseeing projects, offering policy advice and other activities beyond the university.” Survey emailed to 70 programs in January 2011 41 responses received 59% response rate

4. Programs Responding to Survey (41) Mean Median Number of Tenure Track Faculty 10.1 9 Percent of TT Faculty Engaged in Practice 32.5% 27% Number of P-E Faculty 7.8 8 Percent of Courses Offered by P-E Faculty 23.6% 20%

5. Tenure Track Faculty Actively Engaged in Practice Percent of Tenure Track Faculty Engaged in Practice

6. The many varieties of practice engagement: Many tenure track faculty spend much of their time practicing planning Some research oriented faculty have significant experience in practice before joining the university Some faculty move back and forth between practice and teaching The nature of “practice” varies considerably across fields – policy advice, preparing plans, serving on commissions, undertaking policy related research for specific clients, etc.

7. Use of P-Es – Public vs Private UniversitiesMean Number of Faculty (Head Count) n=34 n=7

8. Use of P-Es – City LocationMean Number of Faculty (Head Count) n=8 n=8 n=25

9. Required Courses Currently Taught By P-E Faculty Legal Issues in Planning (14) Planning Studio (7) Planning Skills Workshop (6) Land Use Planning/Growth Mgmt (5) Urban Design (5) Introduction to Planning (4) GIS (3) Quantitative Reasoning/Statistics (2) Neighborhood Planning/Revitalization (2) Land Development/Site Planning (2) Graphic Communication (2) Principles and Practice of Planning (1) Planning Management (1) Urban Economics (1) Economic Impact Assessment (1) Development Review (1) Communication Skills (1) Survey Design and Analysis (1) Public Participation (1) Environmental Planning (1) Transportation Planning (1) Urban Research (1) Internship (1)

10. Program Heads’ Views about P-E TeachingSome courses best taught by P-E Faculty? Yes 38 93% No 3 7%If so, which courses? Studios (18) Law/Land Use Regulations (9) Urban Design (5) Applied Planning Methods (5) Site Planning/Land Dev Planning (4) Transportation Planning (4) Finance (3) GIS (3) Project Management (2) Urban Development/PPP (2) Specialty Courses (2) Craft of Planning (1) Policy Seminars (1) Negotiation/Conflict Resolution (1) Practice related electives (1) Capstone courses (1) Community engagement (1) Communication skills (1) Housing (1) Historic preservation (1) Environmental Impact analysis(1) Planning ethics (1) Grant writing (1)

11. Advantages of P-E Faculty Bring experience of “real-life” planning into the classroom (16) Make connections for students to local professional networks, internships, jobs (13) Bring practical knowledge and skills to students (11) Fill faculty gaps, can diversify faculty (6) Communicate professional standards and norms (5) Inspire students through their actions/serve as role models (4) Bring political issues and “real-politik” into the classroom (3) Cost advantages – less expensive per course than TT faculty (2) Also: Familiarity with local issues, teach specific domain skills, willing to teach in evenings, demonstrate value of techniques and tools, help students relate classroom materials to the field, provide career mentoring, keep alumni engaged, keep curriculum relevant, makes it easier to add new issues to curriculum, provides real understanding of negotiation and tradeoffs, opens door to innovation which occurs largely in the field. N = 41

12. Disadvantages of P-E Faculty Inconsistency of teaching skills, inadequate preparation, conflicting time demands (15) Unaware how course fits into larger curriculum, unsure about expectations (8) Tendency towards “war stories” or criticizing conceptual content “let me tell you how it really is in the field” (7) Limited familiarity with literature and theory (5) Limited availability outside of class for student meetings, advice (5) Lack of familiarity with university culture, contemporary teaching techniques (5) Challenges in course scheduling (3) Also: Shifts advising and administrative burdens to TT faculty and chair, high maintenance, difficulty of integrating with TT faculty, excessive focus on “nuts and bolts” techniques, lack critical perspective, limited amount to say so can’t carry a full class, narrow experience, don’t participate in out of class activities, university unsympathetic to long term teaching, conflicts of interest, year to year inconsistency. N = 41

13. Mentoring and Assistance for P-E Faculty Chair meets annually with PE faculty to review evaluations (15) Provide sample syllabi, review of P-E syllabi by full time faculty, with advice (8) Encourage P-E faculty to attend faculty meetings and retreats (6) Pair new P-E faculty with experienced teachers (4) Chair walks P-E faculty through administrative, university culture issues (4) Regular contact between chair and P-E faculty (4) Encourage P-E faculty to participate in university wide tutorials on teaching (3) Peer visits to classes by experienced faculty, with advice (3) Group with faculty teaching related courses (2) Look for P-E candidates who are likely good teachers (2) N = 41