31 July - 4 August 1995

Strategies for the efficient identification and interpretation of the bibliographies that are most useful for work with rare and early printed books; aimed at reference librarians, booksellers, catalogers, and others who routinely research rare books. Sources primarily in English and in the major other Roman-alphabet languages; but some attention paid to non-Western sources as well.

1. How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Useful, but not necessary -- nice, because I didn't get to them all. 2: I appreciated the June 29th phone confirmation: the mailing was delayed and didn't reach me until July 26th. Otherwise, these would have been helpful. 4: Pre-course readings comprised for the most part descriptions of specific national bibliographies; may have been helpful for us to have examined a few of the standard bibliographies at our own institutions. 7: Not required. 8: I did not have time to search for and gather the pre-course readings prior to RBS, but I don't feel that this detracted in any way from what I was able to get out of the course. 9: They were useful, most especially DK's article to give a flavor of what the course would be. 11: Very useful.

2. Did your instructor prepare sufficiently to teach THIS course? Were the course syllabus and other materials distributed in class useful?

1: 1) Yes. 2) Very much so. 2: Yes, most definitely! 3: Syllabus was most useful. 4: Yes. Yes. 5: Yes. 6: Yes -- materials should be quite useful. 7: Yes. 8: Yes. The syllabus will continue to be an ongoing source of useful information on bibliographies. 9: DK is a gold mine of information! There were a few problems with the locations of various sources. Also, electronic access is changing this area dramatically. 10: The syllabus would have been easier to use if search questions had been separate from the bibliographic lists -- paging back and forth, I shredded my syllabus. 11: Yes to both.

3. Was the intellectual level of the course content appropriate?

1: Yes, even though the problem sets we had were a bit humbling. 3-8: Yes. 9: Certainly appropriate. Also insightful, humorous, stimulating, and challenging. 10: No -- I was lost for much of the course because of my lack of foreign languages. 11: Yes.

4. Did the actual course content correspond to its RBS brochure description and Expanded Course Description? Did the course in general meet your expectations?

1: Yes. Yes. 3: Yes. 4: a) Yes. b) Yes. 5-8: Yes. 9: Yes, it did corresponded to the description. 11: Yes.

5. What did you like best about the course?

1: 1) DK -- his kindness, knowledge of the subject, wisdom, and good humor. I envy his library school students. 2) Class camaraderie. 2: DK: a torrent of information (not merely a fountain!) and a delightful instructor. 3: Being able to use many fine sources that I don't usually use in my professional duties. 4: The expertise that the instructor brought to the course (the man knows his stuff) and the variety of problems assigned. 5: DK could not have been more knowledgeable.6: The instructor -- both his expertise in the area and his graciousness in dealing with students. 7: Gaining familiarity with a wide variety of literature and experience in using much of it. 8: The exposure to a vast array of bibliographies, though intimidating, was most helpful, as were the instructor's comments on the various sources. 9: The relaxed atmosphere and camaraderie of the students and instructor. I also liked the broad scope of the course, but was frustrated that so much was presented so quickly. 11: Instructor.

6. How could the course have been improved?

1: Having the books centrally located, although having them in three locations was good exercise. More time in the day for problem sets -- although I wouldn't want to cut back on class time at all. 2: I would hate to see the scope narrowed (say, to American): the scope was what attracted me, and will no doubt prove to be most useful. 3: Could there be access to OCLC or RLIN? Many course members search these utilities and one was often frustrated at the Windows interface of the public machines (and also the wait for the one terminal to be free). 4: The reference bibliographies which were needed to be consulted for the problem sets would be much handier in one location rather than three (Special Collections, Reference, the stacks); the savings of travel time would be worthwhile. 5: Perhaps more access to the rare book room for reference materials. 6: Perhaps by having the first day devoted to examining the bibliographies themselves (even, perhaps, two days) before the searching assignments begin. Maybe starring essential searches and then having alternate ones if the others are finished. 7: Clearly, there are logistical problems with the locations of the books. I would prefer fewer problems and so more time to spend looking at sources. Perhaps this is unrealistic. I think online searching could be viewed as a legitimate tool, but it has a tendency to become the lowest common denominator and isn't the purpose of the course to learn the literature rather than simply solving the problems? 8: Fewer search queries that repeated the same sources might have left more time for discussing the pros and cons of individual sources. 9: It would help to have all sources in one physical location. We spent a lot of time on the stairs or in the elevators! 10: Tried to cover too much ground -- perhaps in the future special courses might be devoted to specific national bibliographies. 11: Perhaps more emphasis on selective fields of bibliographic research.

7. Any final thoughts?

1: More substance at breakfast, please! (What was there was delicious, though.) 2: Be prepared to become humble, and quickly! I feel very comfortable in performing my day-to-day job as a reference librarian, but felt I was particularly inept at bibliographic detective work (perhaps because 99% of the examples were outside my area of subject expertise?). In any case, you WILL LEARN A GREAT DEAL about approaches to bibliographic verification techniques! 4: Daily problem sets covering the course lectures were assigned -- time was well spent, indeed. 7: I would highly recommend this for just about anyone working with books as a library professional in any capacity. 11: I would recommend this course to anyone interested in the subject.

Number of respondents: 11

Percentages