because most systems software is proprietary and the instructor has to pay a fee each year for a site license with several seats. Also, the full model set requires a considerable effort to populate with datasets and to get running. The MPO would likely have to assist, especially if the instructor wanted to get emissions projections, too. Some instructors use simple systems software, such as QRS or others, but these are generally not used on real metropolitan datasets. So, the challenge for this class was not much different from that for instructors of travel modeling courses. Even though travel models are much simpler that urban models, they are seldom used in their entirety in courses.
For instructors without ready access to previously calibrated models this course structure is daunting and perhaps infeasible. With some restructuring, however, elements of this course could be used in a descriptive course on modeling frameworks. The emphasis would shift from running and evaluating operational models to conceptually comparing the frameworks and the theoretical underpinnings of each framework. Students could be asked to develop simple models of their own using spreadsheet operations and readily available census data. Both Lowry and Alonso type models could be created this way and several texts exist that could help step the students through the process. For example, Modeling the World in a Spreadsheet (Cartwright, 1993), and Operational Urban Models (Foot, 1981), as well as the opening chapters of Integrated Land Use and Transport Modeling (de la Barra, 1989) could all be used as the basis for such an exercise. The other readings presented here should still be of interest in this type of course. This descriptive course would provide a solid foundation for students interested in this subject. The complexity of the subject matter for this course also makes it scaleable. While the course presented here was prepared for Ph.D. students a less