The generally accepted definition for a documentary is ‘the creative treatment of actuality’ (Grierson, 1933, p. 8). Documentary scholars have rigorously discussed and dissected, the meaning that Grierson may have intended for this phrase, (Corner, 1996; Higson, 1995; Montagu, 1964; Winston, 1995). While the terms ‘treatment’ and ‘actuality’ have been debated and defined, interpretations of creativity that cite psychological and socio-cultural creativity research (Csikszentmihalyi, 1996; Sawyer, 2006; Sternberg, 1988, 1999) do not appear in the literature to date.

All research in Australian universities involving human participants needs approval from human research ethics committees, who make judgments consistent with accepted ethical principles that have recently been captured in the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (2007). Making a film as an academic research project is a relatively recent phenomenon and there are apparent contradictions between the requirements for ethics approval and the accepted practice of screen production.

In this paper I examine how my creative practice as a filmmaker prepared me for academia. I argue that the rigors of filmmaking are transferable to other disciplines.