Learning to learn collaboratively

Changes in pedagogies and curricular content are a common occurrence in planning education to both, ensure students are adequately prepared for practice while infusing also new knowledge into the field. There is a long-established tradition of scrutinizing curricula and training pathways via professional associations’ accreditation, practitioners and scholars. Over the last four decades, there has been, for example, considerable debate about how to narrow the gap between (abstract) planning concepts and theories taught in planning programs and the reality of planning practice. Dalton (1986) expressed concern whether educators can overcome expert-centered rational planning conceptions within an educational system that rewards research and rigorous scientific enquiry of a technorational nature, while Baum (1997) mused about the suitability of planning academics as teachers. Similarly, scholars in Africa (e.g. Odendaal, 2012) and Asia have called for reforms of planning curricula to bring planning education in line with professional competencies needed to deal with local issues such as rapid urbanization or informality, or to integrate indigenous knowledges and perspectives in planning. This special issue of Planning Practice and Research is testament that planning education and pedagogy continues to evolve worldwide. The contributions which feature progressive pedagogical practices in planning education from different corners of the world, namely Taiwan, Austria and The Netherlands make for an inspiring read as traditional pedagogies are increasingly being replaced by new modes of teaching and learning; these new modes entail constructing knowledge collaboratively, and interactively often by using real-world applications to mirror professional practices (Mintz, 2020). This development in the early years of the 21st century is reflective of an emerging postmodern education paradigm which ‘calls for new pedagogies to respond to the complexities of a world in which it is impossible even to know what it means to ‘know’, when knowledge itself . . . [is] constantly shifting’ (Lamb & Vodicka, 2021, p. 21). While these changes affect all disciplines and fields, there is a special resonance with planning as the discipline grabbles to prepare students for the now favoured collaborative, communicative approach to practice, more public participation and interdisciplinary working with related professions within its degree programs. In the introduction, the editors, Hsiutzu Betty Chang and Wei-Ju Huang, highlight the immense challenge for planning educators to prepare students adequately for professional practice. They pinpoint specifically the taxing tasks put before planners such as promoting sustainability, developing resilience in communities, and adapting cities to climate change. Planning practitioners are expected to have not only the