Automated system test schedule

Abstract

View link

As the only female lecturer on the Creative Advertising (CA) course, I’m in a position to use an autoethnographic approach to analyse the impact of gender in interactions between staff and students and the teaching and learning and evaluating of creative ideas. The Creative Advertising Course (CA) is run along similar lines to an advertising agency creative department. As such it’s very informal; ‘laddish banter’ is not only acceptable, it’s encouraged. Staff are seen as ‘creative directors’, setting creative briefs and giving feedback on creative solutions. The aim of the course is to help students develop a portfolio of advertising campaigns that they will use to get a job in the industry. 99% of the teaching staff are male, with Level 2 (L2) and Level 3 (L3) being taught by an all-male team of lecturers. The one female lecturer teaches solely on Level 1 (L1). This dynamic does not reflect today’s advertising agencies, as most now have a better male/female ratio at senior levels. I will discuss the importance of gender in the teaching and evaluation of advertising creative ideas, and how the CA course would benefit from acknowledging how an awareness of the effects of ‘doing gender’ (West & Zimmerman: 1987) can better prepare our students for today’s advertising industry. While studies have failed to show any difference between the ‘creative’ ability of men and women, the applied creativity necessary in developing creative advertising ideas is highly subjective and reliant on ‘gatekeepers’ to validate whether or not the idea is ‘creative’. (Csikszentmihalyi: 1999) This is in itself problematic given that these decisions are made by an all-male staff team who will have male values, ideals, cultural references, sense of humour etc. on which to base their judgements. Studies also show that when faced with male gatekeepers, women will often adopt masculine values and learn to ‘think like a man’ when coming up with ideas.