What and How Should Urban Planners Learn in the AI Era? Exploring Urban AI Pedagogy from a Pilot Course in Urban Planning Education

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) promises to transform urban planning research, practice, and education, yet few curricula address “Urban AI.” This paper presents the pedagogical design of a pilot Urban AI course and argues for three meta learning goals: applying AI effectively and appropriately in urban challenges, addressing its social, environmental, and governance impacts, and developing normative judgments and professional identities around AI. Pilot teaching produced a knowledge graph connecting essential skills to these goals and a critical framework for AI use and reflection, grounded in analysis of 235 student reflection journals, alongside course evaluations, syllabus materials, and student projects.

Keywords

urban AI urban informatics planning pedagogy

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Atenas

Javiera

Havemann

Leo

Nerantzi

Chrissi

. 2025. “Critical and Creative Pedagogies for Artificial Intelligence and Data Literacy: An Epistemic Data Justice Approach for Academic Practice.” Research in Learning Technology 32:3296.

Axelrod

Judah

Lydia

Bronin

Sara C.

2023. “Automating Zoning Data Collection: Results from a Pilot Effort to Automate National Zoning Atlas Methodologies.” Urban Institute, February 27. https://www.urban.org/research/publication/automating-zoning-data-collection.

Batty

Michael

. 2013. The New Science of Cities. Cambridge: MIT press.

Biesta

Gert J. J.

2015. Good Education in an Age of Measurement: Ethics, Politics, Democracy. New York: Routledge.

Boukerche

Azzedine

Hou

Zhijun

. 2021. “Object Detection Using Deep Learning Methods in Traffic Scenarios.” ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 54 (2): 1–35.

Boyco

Morgon

Robinson

Pamela

. 2025. “A Planner’s AI Dilemmas Cards.” Canadian Institute of Planners and Ontario Professional Planners Institute National Planning Conference. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/393479227_A_Planner’s_AI_Dilemmas_Cards.

Brinkley

Catherine

Stahmer

Carl

. 2024. “What is in a Plan? Using Natural Language Processing to Read 461 California City General Plans.” Journal of Planning Education and Research 44 (2): 632–48.

Chaturvedi

Vikram

de Vries

Walter Timo

. 2021. “Machine Learning Algorithms for Urban Land Use Planning: A Review.” Urban Science 5(3): 68.

Clayton

Paige

Goodspeed

Robert

Green

Jamaal

Lassiter

Allison

Riggs

William

Wilson

Bev

. 2025. “More than Analytics: Five Approaches to Educating Professionals to Shape Today’s Digital Cities.” Journal of Planning Education and Research 15:726–32.

10.

Deng

Ruiqi

Jiang

Maoli

Xinlu

Yuyan

Liu

Shasha

. 2025. “Does ChatGPT Enhance Student Learning? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Experimental Studies.” Computers & Education 227:1–35.

11.

Drummond

William J.

French

Steven P.

2008. “The Future of GIS in Planning: Converging Technologies and Diverging Interests.” Journal of the American Planning Association 74 (2): 161–74.

12.

Dueker

Kenneth J.

2007. “Geographic Information Systems and Computer-Aided Mapping.” Journal of the American Planning Association 53 (3): 383–90.

13.

Freire

Paulo

. 2000. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Translated by Ramos

Myra Bergman

. 50th Anniversary Edition. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

14.

French

Steven P.

Wiggins

Lyna L.

1989. “Computer Adoption and Use in California Planning Agencies: Implications for Education.” Journal of Planning Education and Research 8 (2): 97–108.

15.

Xinyu

Chaosu

Zhai

Wei

. 2023. “Using natural Language Processing to Read Plans: A Study of 78 Resilience Plans from the 100 Resilient Cities Network.” Journal of the American Planning Association 89 (1): 107–19.

16.

Godschalk

David R.

McMahon

Gerard

. 1992. “Staffing the Revolution: GIS Education for Planners.” Journal of Planning Education and Research 11 (3): 216–26.

17.

Huang

Xiao

Wang

Siqin

Wilson

John

Kedron

Peter

. 2025. Geoai and Human Geography. Berlin: Springer.

18.

Ito

Koichi

Kang

Yuhao

Zhang

Fan

Biljecki

Filip

. 2024. “Understanding Urban Perception with Visual Data: A Systematic Review.” Cities 152:105169.

19.

Kolb

David A.

1984. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Vol. 1. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

20.

Kontokosta

Constantine E.

2021. “Urban Informatics in the Science and Practice of Planning.” Journal of Planning Education and Research 41 (4): 382–95.

21.

Lee

Jongwon

. 2025. “Generative AI and Geography Education.” In GeoAI and Human Geography: The Dawn of a New Spatial Intelligence Era, edited by Wilson

John

Kedron

Peter

Wang

Siqin

Huang

Xiao

, 297–312, Cham: Springer.

22.

Lehmann

Matthias

Cornelius

Philipp B.

Sting

Fabian J.

2024. “AI Meets the Classroom: When Does ChatGPT Harm Learning?” https://arxiv.org/pdf/2409.09047v1.

23.

Lewis

Armanda

Stoyanovich

Julia

. 2022. “Teaching Responsible Data Science: Charting New Pedagogical Territory.” International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 32 (3): 783–807.

24.

Montagu

A. Simon

. 2001. “Repackaging the Revolution: Making GIS Instruction Relevant to Planners.” Journal of Planning Education and Research 21 (2): 184–95.

25.

Morley

David

. 2022. “Zoning for Data Centers and Crytocurrency Mining.” American Planning Association—Zoning Practice. https://www.planning.org/publications/document/9249180/.

26.

Nichols

Carlie

. 2025. “The Physical Footprint of Artificial Intelligence.” American Planning Association—Zoning Practice. https://www.planning.org/publications/document/9318086/.

27.

Planning Accreditation Board. 2025. “PAB Accreditation Standards and Criteria.” https://www.planningaccreditationboard.org/amended-2022-accreditation-standards/.

28.

Quan

Steven Jige

. 2022. “Urban-GAN: An Artificial Intelligence-Aided Computation System for Plural Urban Design.” Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science 49 (9): 2500–15.

29.

Salazar-Miranda

Arianna

Talen

Emily

. 2025. “An AI-Based Analysis of Zoning Reforms in US Cities.” Nature Cities 2:304–15.

30.

Sanchez

Thomas W.

Brenman

Marc

Xinyue

. 2025. “The Ethical Concerns of Artificial Intelligence in Urban Planning.” Journal of the American Planning Association 91 (2): 294–307.

31.

Sanchez

Thomas W.

Shumway

Hannah

Gordner

Trey

Lim

Theo

. 2023. “The Prospects of Artificial Intelligence in Urban Planning.” International Journal of Urban Sciences 27 (2): 179–94.

32.

Schön

Donald A.

[1983] 1984. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books.

33.

Xinming

Zou

James

Weijie J.

Zhang

Linjun

. 2023. “What Should Data Science Education Do with Large Language Models?” arXiv [preprint]. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2307.02792.

34.

Abraham Noah

Stouffs

Rudi

Biljecki

Filip

. 2022. “Generative Adversarial Networks in the Built Environment: A Comprehensive Review of the Application of GANs across Data Types and Scales.” Building and Environment 223:109477.

35.

Xinyue

Yigitcanlar

Tan

Goodchild

Michael

Huang

Xiao

Wenwen

Shaw

Shih-Lung

Yanjie

Gong

Wenjing

Newman

Galen

. 2025. “Artificial Intelligence in Urban Science: Why Does It Matter?” Annals of GIS 31 (2): 181–89.

36.

Zheng

Fengli

Lin

Yuming

Santi

Paolo

Ratti

Carlo

Wang

Qi R.

Yong

. 2025. “Urban Planning in the Era of Large Language Models.” Nature Computational Science 5:727–36.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.41 MB