آموزش آنلاین کارگاه طراحی شهری در مواجهه با عدم قطعیت

[1] Grant Long J (2011) State of the studio: revisiting the potential of studio pedagogy in U.S.-based planning programs. Journal of Planning Education & Research 32(4): 431-448.
[2] Roberts M (2016) Urban design pedagogy. Journal of Urban Design 21(5): 567-569.
[3] Leadbeatter D (2019) What is Integrative Learning? Teaching in Higher Education 26(1): 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2019.1632824
[4] Madanipour A (1997) Ambiguities of Urban Design. Town Planning Review 68(3): 363-383.
[5] Banerjee T (2011) Response to Commentary: Is Urban Design Still Urban Planning? Whither Urban Design? Inside or Outside Planning? Journal of Planning Education & Research 31(2): 208-21.
[6] Myers D & Banerjee T (2005) Toward greater heights for planning: reconciling the differences between profession, practice, and academic field. Journal of the American Planning Association 71(2): 121-129.
[7] Marshall S (2012) Science, Pseudo-Science & Urban Design. Urban Design International 17(4): 257-271.
[8] Dovey K & Pafka E (2016) The science of urban design? Urban Design International 21(1): 1-10.
[9] Willson R (2000) Comparing in-class and computer-mediated discussion using a communicative action framework. Journal of Planning Education & Research 19: 409 -18.
[10] Balsas C (2012) What about Plan Evaluation? Integrating Evaluation in Urban Planning Studio’s Pedagogy. Planning Practice & Research 27(4): 475-494.
[11] Fadjar I M (2017) Open urban design: An explorative review on urban design studio UIA 2017 Seoul World Architects Congress. http://www.uia2017seoul.org/P/assets/html/5-3-special.html
[12] Arefi M & Triantafillou, M (2005) Reflections on the pedagogy of place & urban design. Journal of Planning Education & Research 25(1): 75-88.
[13] Palazzo D (2011) Pedagogical traditions. In T Banerjee & A Loukaitou-Sideris (Eds.), Companion to Urban Design. New York: Routledge, pp. 41-53.
[14] Neuman M (2016) Teaching collaborative and interdisciplinary service-based urban design and planning studios. Journal of Urban Design 21(5): 596-615.
[15] Inam A (2011) From dichotomy to dialectic: practicing theory in urban design. Journal of Urban Design 16(2): 257-277.
[16] Moudon A V (1992) A Catholic Approach to Organizing what Urban Designers should Know. Journal of Planning Literature 6(4): 331-349.
[17] Catanese AJ (1984) The seven golden rules: politics in planning & urban design. UD Review 7(1): 11-12.
[18] Kitchen T (2006) Skills for planning practice. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
[19] Tokman L & Yamacli R (2007) Reality-based Design Studio in Architectural Education. Journal of Architectural & Planning Research 24(3): 245-269.
[20] Senbel M (2012) Experiential Learning and the Co-Creation of Design Artifacts: A Hybrid Urban Design Studio for Planners. Journal of Planning Education & Research 32(4): 449-464.
[21] Arefi M & Al-Douri F (2016) Exploring Pedagogical Opportunities Between Architecture & Planning: The Case of University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Planning Theory & Practice 17(1): 72-92.
[22] Arefi M & Edelman D (2013) Morrow tomorrow: Exploring the Pedagogical Experience of a Planning Studio Involving Students with Mixed Skills. Current Urban Studies 1(3): 59-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/cus.2013.13007
[23] Higgins M, Aitken-Rose E & Dixon J (2009) The pedagogy of the planning studio: A view from down under. Journal of Education in the Built Environment 4(1): 8-30.
[24] Birch E L (2001) Practitioners and the Art of Planning. Journal of Planning Education & Research 20(4): 407-422.
[25] Arefi M & Ghaffari, N (2020) Five Episodes of Urban Discovery as a Student Recruitment Strategy in Planning. Journal of Planning Education & Research (Commentary). https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X20903362
[26] Kreditor A (1990) The Neglect of Urban Design in the American Academic Succession. Journal of Planning Education & Research 9(3): 155-163.
[27] King A (2013) From sage on the stage to guide on the side. College Teaching 41(1): 30–35.
[28] Tucker R & Reynolds C (2006) The impact of teaching models, group structures and assessment modes on cooperative learning in the student design studio. Journal of Education in the Built Environment 1(2): 39-56.
[29] Schön D (1983) The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
[30] Bridge G (2004) Everyday rationality and the emancipatory City. In L Lees (Ed), The Emancipatory City? Paradoxes and Possibilities. New York: Routledge, pp. 123–138.
[31] Jacobs A (1985) Looking at Cities, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
[32] Stevens Q (2007) The Ludic City: Exploring the Potential of Public Spaces. London: Routledge.
[33] Raban J (1974) Soft City. New York: E. P. Dutton.
[34] Lynch K (1960) The Image of the City. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
[35] Clay G (1973) Close-up: How to Read the American City. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
[36] Sandercock L (2003) Out of the closet: The importance of stories and storytelling in planning practice. Planning Theory & Practice 4(1): 11–28.
[37] Annala J J Linden, M Makinen, & J Henriksson (2021) Understanding Academic Agency in Curriculum Change in Higher Education. Teaching in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2021.1881772