In order to clarify the choice for the professor of literature between a course dedicated to digital works and a course integrating digital as one of the parameters of literary education, this study suggests three successive approaches: digital works as teaching material, uses in digital literary training and a survey of representations. If the integration of digital works in literature courses can be considered in a perspective of literary history, it can also focus on an analytical reading without disturbing so much the actions of teachers. By contrast, much more radical disturbances on the distinctive landmarks of creative works, literality or the concept of literarity (Gefen 2012; Bouchardon 2014; Saemmer 2018) can be seen in teaching experiences with digital creative writing. Digital uses in teacher’s classes in accordance with Dewey’s theory of aesthetic experience (1934) call for focusing the attention towards the interior of the creative process. It also calls for the deployment of a didactic framework which is aware of the characteristics of digital writing (Lacelle, Boutin, Lebrun 2017; Petitjean, Cordier, Alamargot 2017). To investigate the representations used in conceiving such a didactic approach, two surveys were conducted in parallel: one with teachers (75 respondents) and another one with writers and apprentice writers (90 respondents). Their comparative analysis highlights some discrepancies between representations and actual digital practices but also brings to light the teachers’ wish to better understand how digital practices change the creative writing practices of writers. Our study is supported by the research group "Creative writing in training: epistemological issues and research methodologies" of the Paris Seine Excellence Initiative.