Creativity is an area of interest both for the Academy and the professional market, despite the difficulty in defining it (Roca and Mensa, 2009; Guildford, 1950; Taylor, 1959; Estanyol i Casals, 2012), since the mid 20th century Taylor (1959) had already gathered more than 100 definitions for it. There are many approaches to creativity from psychology, art, business, pedagogy, medicine, or Communication since it is linked to social progress (Arroyo, 2005; Fernández, Llamas and Gutiérrez, 2019). Thus, for authors like De La Torre, Sanz de Acedo, Sanz de Acedo and Ardáiz, Izquierdo and López or Garín, López and Llamas among others (in Fernández, Llamas and Gutiérrez, 2019), it is implicit in all facets of human beings as a holistic capacity; Esquivias (2004, p. 3) acknowledges it “as a multidimensional factor that implies the interaction or concatenation between multiple dimensions”. Within this consideration, “it is the result of the interaction of a system composed of three elements. A culture that contains symbolic rules, a person who bring novelty to the symbolic field and a field of experts who recognize and validate innovation” (Csikszenmihalyi, 1998, p. 78). García interprets it as “the ability to associate, combine and/or restructure real or imaginary elements, in a new meaningful order within a given cultural context, and/or to elaborate original, valuable and innovative ideas or products for the society or the individual” (García García, 1991, in García García and Morales, 2011, p. 72). Moreover, the creativity-communication link has been reinforced in the last decade due to technological advances that have converted the public into creative audiences (Castells, 2010, in García López, 2016).

The importance of creativity has been studied in all phases of learning in pedagogy (Estanyol i Casals, 2012). Most authors agree that it is an acquired skill and point out the importance of a context for developing it (Fernández, Llamas and Gutiérrez, 2019; Rajadell, 2019; Guilera, 2020). Ballester (2002, p. 72) indicates that students’ creative side can be fostered in the classroom “from personal experiences and emotions” and using divergent thinking. Thus, creativity is “an opportunity to train people to adapt to change and come up with solutions and challenges” (Castillo, Ezquerro, Llamas and López, 2016, p. 9), and specific competencies related to it to improve learning (Long, Ibrahim, and Kowang, 2014; Hurtado, García, Rivera and Forgiony, 2018).

In the higher education area, investigations focused on its assessment have been conducted (Daly, Mosyjowski and Seifert, 2014), the importance of cultivating it in the student body (Cropley and Cropley, 2000) or in the creative teacher and his/her methodology (De la Torre, 2009). Although there are several studies related to learning creativity in the university context (Court, 1998; Livingston, 2010; Long, Ibrahim, and Kowang, 2014; Daly, Mosyjowski and Seifert, 2014; Vallejo, Daher and Rincón, 2020), it is necessary to go in-depth into how it is used in the field of Communication.

The study has focused on the subject teaching guides of the AV and Advertising and Public Relations degrees taught in Spanish public universities in the academic year 2019/2020 or 2020/2021, extracted from institutional websites. The occurrence of the following terms (and their variants) in the guides have been investigated:

• Creativity

• Creation

• Creative

• Conceptualization

• Innovation

Previous studies have analyzed the presence of these terms in the nomenclature of the subjects (Castelló-Martínez, 2020; Estanyol i Casals, 2012), although, in this research, the fields of analysis have been extended to include: name, degree, university, course, objectives, contents, competencies, and evaluation. 1, 978 subjects were identified, and after excluding unavailable ones, the study corpus consisted of 1,925 documents. The data was processed based on a descriptive statistic and frequency study using SPSS software.

A mixed questionnaire with 44 questions was designed to determine the faculty’s view (Meneses and Rodríguez, 2011); it included teaching methodology and evaluation of this skill (Gervilla, 1980), tools for teaching, or the creative students’ characteristics, among others.

Of the total questionnaires sent (COMUNICACIÓN database of Red Iris, the list of distribution services from the Spanish Scientific Community, 1,790 subscribers), 44 answers were obtained from teachers from 20 institutions (graph 1), slightly more than 2.45% of the sample. 52.3% are men, and 38.6% are over 54; most have PhDs(95.3%), while the rest have obtained a Master’s degree. Almost all of them are part of a branch of Communication (mainly Journalism and Advertising and Public Relations), although there are also Sociology or Psychology graduates.

Graph 1:

Universities of faculty affiliation.

Source: authors

43.2% teach in Advertising and PR, 36.4% in AV, and over 13% teach in both, covering various subjects.

An expert panel composed of five managers in several Communications and advertising agencies was created for industry professionals. These companies usually hire graduates from both degrees:

• Francisco Rodríguez, Founding Partner and CEO of El Ruso de Rocky.

• Mauricio Leirado, Creative Director of Ymedia.

• David Vijil, Creative Director of Proximity.

• Gonzalo Urriza, Creative Director of Contrapunto BBDO.

• Guillermo Santaisabel, Executive Creative Director MRM Spain.

The panel took place during November and December 2020, and it was based on interviews to learn about the creative competencies in demand in the labor market and new professionals’ profiles.

The AV degree is concentrated in 60.9% of the teaching guides (ni=1172) compared with 39.1% for Advertising (ni=753) (table 2). The terms studied are found more (56.1%) in the third and fourth years (ni=1080). It is also noted that they do not appear in 1.9% of the cases.

Table 2:

Teaching guides by degree.

Source: authors/SPSS

The University of Girona’s (7.1%) and the Complutense University of Madrid’s (6.1%) teaching guides use the terminology analyzed the most. In contrast, the University of Castilla La Mancha is the one that does so the least (2.1%).

Regarding the terms analyzed, 2.07% of the programs include “creation” in their degrees, the term “creativity” occupies 1.25% of the documents, 0.78% of the guides deal with the term “creative(s),” “innovation” (0.15%) and “conceptualization” (0.052%). In the course objectives, no terms were found in 54.2% of the cases. When they do appear, they refer to “conceptualization” (28.7%)- meaning creation and/or analysis of theoretical concepts- and “creation” (7.5%)- with two variants, one consisting of the analysis of artistic, aesthetic, or Communication creations, and another focused on the action of carrying out a project or task-. The term “creativity” appears anecdotally in this section (1.1%), applied as theoretical training to recognize creativity or as the acquisition of this practical skill.

The words studied are not detected in subject contents in 71.5% of the guides. However, mention is made to the concept “creation” (11.4%), which generally refers to carrying out an activity and not to the creative process- and “creative” (4.9%)- as an adjective in a heading, theoretical in any case-, or both (2.1%) or “conceptualization” (3.1%)- as a theoretical heading referring to the analysis of concepts and not to the action of conceptualizing-.

Regarding competencies (See Table 3), the terms analyzed appear in 49.9% of the documents. They include the terms “creativity” (8.2%)- as the “ability to take expressive and thematic risks within the framework of audiovisual production availability and deadlines, applying personal solutions and points of view to develop projects” as stated in the White Paper on Communication Degrees (ANECA, 2005, p. 264), in the case of AV; or as an “ability to evolve towards the unknown, based on a solid knowledge of the present” (ANECA, 2005, p. 291), in the case of Advertising and PR- “creation” (8.2%)- is defined as the ability to do something following a process- or both (5.8%); and “creative” (6.3%)- to qualify the process of doing projects or to add adjectives to a task or process-.

Table 3:

Main terms that appear in the competencies.

Source: authors/SPSS

Creativity is not evaluated in 87.3% of the guides analyzed (ni=1681); “creation” (3.5%), “creativity,” “creative” (2.2%), and “conceptualization” (2.1%) are the most recurring terms. In most cases, they are used as synonyms for an activity (creation) or the approach to a project (conceptualization). Few guides include creativity, the creative process, innovation, or conceptualization as specific evaluation criteria that can be assessed through a point system, rubrics, or any other grading tool.

A two-dimensional cross table shows the relationship between the contents identified both in the objectives and evaluation. Thus, no terms related to creativity were detected in the indicated sections (50.7%), even if “conceptualization” (21.7%) and “creation” (6.65%) are words included in the objectives- there is no record of these in the evaluation-. Something similar is true for “creative”, which is present only in objectives (3.38%).

Regarding contents and competencies, there is no relationship in 40.37% of the cases. It is important to note that when the competencies deal with “creation” (6.02%), the content does not deal with “creativity” (4.88%), which is also the case with the term “creative” (4.05%). But when “conceptualization” is mentioned in the competencies (1.82%), it is part of the subject contents. At the same time, when the words “creation” (1.09%), “creativity” (1.14%), and “creative” (1.03%) appear in the competencies, the word “creation” is found in the content, and when “creativity” is mentioned in the competencies (0.56%), the term “creative” appears in the content.

Finally, the contingency table of the variables competencies-content and evaluation reveals that the term “creativity” is not found in competencies, content, or evaluation in 82 guides (4.25%). Nor is it included in evaluation when “creativity” appears in competencies and “creation” in content (0.88%). When referring to the term “creative” in competencies, it is not recorded in content or evaluation in 3.53% of the cases, nor is it included in the last section when the guide deals with the “creative” competence and content related to “creation” (0.83%).

Although 75% of the respondents indicate that their subjects are not related to the development of creativity, 65.9% include it among their teaching objectives, 61.4% consider it as a competency, 72.7% incorporate it in the contents along with the creative process, and 68.2% consider creativity as an evaluation criterion (graph 2).

Graph 2:

Criteria for evaluating creativity.

Source: authors

58.8% use rubrics in each assignment to evaluate creativity, and 38.2% stipulate that it is a percentage of the final grade in order to grade it.

Regarding creativity as a competence for graduates, 88.6% consider it transversal in the AV and 100% in Advertising and PR. 90.9% implement innovative teaching methodologies, even if their subjects are not directly related to creativity; project-based (77.5%), problem-based (50%), and collaborative learning (47.5%) were the most prominent. 88.6% use training techniques to foster creativity, especially brainstorming (61.5%) and a digital portfolio (43.6%).

70.5% affirm that they dedicate time and/or specific sessions to planning subjects that foster creativity (graph 3), although only 35.5% confirm allocating at least one hour a week to it.

Graph 3:

Hours dedicated to teaching creativity.

Source: authors

On the other hand, when asked about the promotion of creativity in Spanish universities-1 for not at all and 5 for very much- no respondent gave the highest ratings (4 or 5), most gave a 3 (59.1%) rating.

Concerning the problems that professors encounter when teaching creativity, the following are highlighted (Table 4):

Table 4:

Main problems for teaching creativity according to teachers.

Source: authors

On the other hand, 52.3% use social networks in their teaching, YouTube and Instagram were preferred, and 50% work with software and applications, Adobe Photoshop (or a similar open-source) and Google tools were used the most, 34.8% for each, followed by Adobe Indesign or similar tools, with 30.4%.

Concerning creativity as a skill, 88.6% consider that it can be learned, while only 8.1% believe that it is innate, pointing out the creative student’s following characteristics (table 5):

Table 5:

The characteristics of creative students according to teachers.

Source: authors

Teachers stimulate participation in the learning process to foster creativity a lot (54.5%) quite a lot (31.8%) a little (11.4%) or not at all (2.27%); through exercises for developing thinking and cognitive skills (a lot 36.3% and 45.4% quite a lot, a little 1.4% and not at all 6.8%); and by stimulating innovation as a challenge a lot (47.7%) or quite a lot (31.8%) while 15.9% do it a little and 4.5% not at all.

Finally, most teachers (52.3%) acknowledge that the development of digital environments has improved students’ creativity and their creativity abilities (graph 4) are now average (50%).

Graph 4:

Rating (from 1 to 5) of students’ creative abilities.

Source: authors

Experts maintain that creativity is an innate skill, which some people have a knack for, but it can be enhanced and exercised:

I think that part of it is an innate talent, personality, being creative in your way of thinking. I am not speaking from an advertising point of view but a purely creative one, to give everything a twist, no matter how insignificant it may seem. [...] But without training and learning, you can fall into monotony and stop being creative ”. (Santaisabel, Personal Communication, December 18, 2020).

However, “there is a bias because many people believe that they are not creative, and not everyone can be an Advertising Creative Director, but everyone can be creative to some extent” (Urriza, Personal Communication, December 10, 2020).

For experts, creativity must be in the education system across the board and be incorporated into all areas, since nowadays “it seems to be quite geared towards killing creativity, divergence is frowned upon and exploring new avenues seems to be a nuisance” (Rodríguez, Personal Communication, November 27, 2020). They agree that it is necessary to give it value and incorporate it into the curriculum in a global way, since “creativity is solving problems or resolving challenges in new ways, through different avenues, it is something that would be useful in almost any branch.” (Leirado, Personal Communication, December 2, 2020). However, they do not believe that creativity is a concept that is taken into account when developing curricula:

I have the impression that more is said about creativity than is invested in it, which is inconsistent. There is still a long way to go in this regard. Creativity must be transversal; it is a philosophy. The basis is to educate on self-esteem, that one’s particular vision is good, diversity, what is different is good, it is not strange [...] The ego must be strengthened because it is good to believe that we have good ideas, but not that we always have the best ideas. (Urriza, Personal Communication, December 10, 2020).

Regarding higher education, creativity is associated with Advertising and PR, and AV and is highlighted. However, it is present in many professions, according to the Creative Director of BBDO since, for example, “you have to be very creative to find a vaccine” (Urriza, Personal Communication, December 10, 2020). At a professional level, the ideal environment for developing creative thinking is “an agency with real challenges and working as a team with planners, production, accounts, etc.” (Rodríguez, Personal Communication, November 27, 2020).

After examining the degrees’ teaching programs in this study, the experts agree that theoretical contents are still overly weighted: “Too much theory and too little practice; I am not speaking about real professional experience, but projects that make them put what they have learned into practice” (Rodríguez, Personal Communication, November 27, 2020). At the same time, they believe that mnemonics are still prioritized over encouraging other facets of the student body: “Our educational level is poor compared to previous generations, even more so. Evaluation in our country consists of repeating a syllabus, not how it is assimilated and how it is reinterpreted. Memory is valued, not creativity “. (Vijil, Personal Communication, December 3, 2020). And this in contrast to the creative explosion that is taking place in specific fields outside the university, such as social media and Communication (Santaisabel, Personal Communication, December 18, 2020).

For Gonzalo Urriza, creativity is a transversal and positive asset for human beings in all aspects: “It is a differentiating quality, it helps you to stand out, to get out of trouble, to be efficient and to move up. It is basic in any profession, and although it is exploited less in some rather than others, creativity is useful in all of them” (Urriza, Personal Communication, December 10, 2020).

These experts state that among the requirements to be met by junior Advertising and AV professionals (table 6) is the handling of specific computer tools: “We are aware of what can be asked of an intern or junior professional, but they have to handle the programs because it is like someone who wants to enter a Formula 1 team but does not even have a driver’s license (Urriza, Personal Communication, December 10, 2020). Likewise, graduates also lack better preparation for facing difficulties that lie ahead in the professional field:

Students do not adapt to the market, and this must be criticized so that public education improves. Theoretical knowledge of semiotics, history of Communication, or art history is very good; this basic training must be solid, but it must be accompanied by theoretical and technical knowledge of processes, which students are often unaware of, and through practical experience. In the private Masters, they teach how to channel knowledge into an idea that can be done within the public university because it does not make sense that you have to do a private Master’s degree that simulates agency work after completing a degree. That should be done within the public university degrees (Urriza, Personal Communication, December 10, 2020).

Table 6:

Junior Communication professional in Spain.

Source: authors, based on an expert panel

When it comes to activities that can enhance new workers’ creativity, Leirado still believes in the benefits of a traditional technique: “What works for me is to discuss ideas in a group. Brainstorming is the easiest way to come up with good ideas. And then take those budding ideas, shape them and see if they work. Then with those more developed ideas to go back and discuss them in groups” (Leirado, Personal Communication, December 2, 2020). They also highlight other routines and practices with which creativity can be exercised (Table 7).

Table 7:

Recommendations for enhancing creativity.

Source: authors, based on an expert panel

Regarding the profiles of professors in these disciplines, the interviewees agree that it is fundamental to have knowledge and experience regarding professional practice: “With these case studies, teachers who work in the industry. Challenging the student to think, not to learn. […] And not grading, but guiding and explaining other available avenues to reach an idea.” (Vijil, Personal Communication, December 3, 2020). However, to complete this idea, they suggest others such as better remuneration and teacher training: “Teachers should be valued, well paid so that they are really good and have a pedagogical profile. They do not all have to come from the advertising world. Still, they should be good at what they do, whether journalists, writers, etc.” (Urriza, Personal Communication, December 10, 2020).

Regarding young professionals’ shortcomings (Table 6), difficulties in applying theoretical knowledge to real needs and the lack of the capacity for strategic analysis and making proposals are highlighted: “we need people with opinions, more used to analyzing situation and problems, with the ability to arrive at their own conclusions, more self-confident and not afraid of taking a stand or expressing well-argued opinions” (Leirado, Personal Communication, December 2, 2020).

From the perspective of professional practice, the interviewees point out aspects that could be implemented in university programs to facilitate graduate employability, such as enhancing practice, real work dynamics, and the use of computer programs, as well as the acquisition of broader visual and cultural references (table 8).

Table 8:

Proposal of aspects to be improved in communication studies according to professionals in the sector.

Source: authors, based on the expert panel.