Purpose of Review <p>Increasing ecological connectivity among urban greenspaces is a global conservation priority to protect urban wildlife. However, effective monitoring remains a challenge, as connectivity models are rarely validated against biological data despite the need for these models to represent real wildlife movement. Here, we systematically reviewed the urban connectivity literature to assess (i) the extent of connectivity model validation; (ii) how validation varies by study objectives; (iii) where urban connectivity research is conducted; and (iv) what types of connectivity metrics, taxa, and biological data are used.</p> Recent Findings <p>Of the 430 studies reviewed, nearly half validated their connectivity models using biological data, but few used movement data. Structural connectivity metrics dominated, although use of functional metrics has increased in recent years. A clear taxonomic bias was also evident, with a disproportionate focus on birds. When validation was conducted, most relied on species richness or other biodiversity metrics. Such approaches offer ambiguous evidence for actual connectivity, as biodiversity patterns are often influenced by confounding factors like greenspace size and the speciesarea relationship. As such, direct empirical support for connectivity models capturing wildlife movement remains limited.</p> Summary <p>Urban connectivity models are often applied without clear evidence that they represent actual ecological processes. To address this, future studies should incorporate a broader range of taxa and test multiple model types to disentangle how movement patterns align with different connectivity frameworks. Integrating biological validation, particularly movement data, into connectivity modelling is essential to tracking progress toward global goals for ecologically resilient cities. </p>