1) How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Useful in a general sense, though they became truly relevant after a day or two into the actual class. 2: Fine as introduction. 3: Pitti's essay was the best. EAD page at LOC was great. Cook book OK; rather dense. 4: Extremely useful. It was a very comprehensive list of literature, that helped me understand better the context of the course. 5: Very useful to gain context and insight especially for the first two class days. Particularly the SGML readings. 6: Very useful. Especially DP's article and the overview of EAD structure.

2) Were the course syllabus and other materials distributed in class useful (or will they be so in the future, after you return home)?

1: Yes, very much so. 2: Yes. 3: Yes, excellent. 4: The handbook was very useful. I will be using it later for examples, instructions, and bibliography. 5: As long as everything works, the technologies we learned will be very applicable to work situations. As indicated, a new finding aid for class use would be helpful, and perhaps some additional and disparate examples of finding aids would help. 6: Yes.

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

1: Yes. 2: Yes. I think it was, has been, well conceived and organized, with theoretical and historical context, group example, then individual work. 3: Very well done. 4: Yes, and I would like to see a more advanced course on this subject. 5: Yes, very. 6: Yes. The depth of analysis and exploration of the theoretical framework of the course was appropriate, relevant and quite rewarding.

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

1-2: Yes. 3: Yes -- better since DP made it seem less technologically intimidating. 4: Yes. 5: I felt it did very well. 6: Yes.

5) What did you like best about the course?

1: The instructor's tact and patience with students whose conversancy with the material varied widely. 2: DP. He has a lively mind, a sense of humor, is passionate about his work, takes pride in it, cares also about his instruction and is generally engaging. 3: Quick application of encoding principles with syntax structures. 4: Very inspiring instructor. Open discussions on the current issues in the archival world and the future of standards. Also, small class made it possible to learn a lot. 5: The ability to get hands on information and demonstration interspersed with discussion of more in-depth topics. 6: The combination of theoretical explanation with practical application. This is the most meaningful technological course I have taken because of the breadth and depth of the content and the tangible result of beginning to encode my own finding aid. DP is an excellent instructor: his knowledge and expertise, patience with technological difficulties, wit, and ability to clarify the obscurities and confusion inherent in complex technology are invaluable teaching attributes.

6) How could the course have been improved?

1: No suggestions for improvement. It was well- organized, well-paced, and covered the essentials. 2: I felt it went well for the entire group. 4: This is probably not possible -- but it would be best if it was longer, perhaps 10 days. 5: I was hoping for more time spent on display and set-up of home or consortia finding aid resources, but I realize that there is only so much time. I look forward to advanced issues classes. 6: The course was excellent. The instructor was excellent.

7) We are always concerned about the physical well-being both of the RBS teaching collections and of materials owned by UVa's Special Collections. If relevant, what suggestions do you have for the improved classroom handling of such materials used in your course this week?

5: Not really applicable. Another class used the computer during the lunch break on occasion but seeing how we monopolized it all week, I feel a little greedy being annoyed by that.

8) Please comment on the quality/enjoyability of the various RBS activities in which you took part outside of class (e.g. Sunday afternoon tour, Sunday night dinner, evening lectures, Bookseller Night, Video Night, Study Night, tour of the Alderman digital/electronic centers, printing demonstrations, &c.).

1: All enjoyable and worthwhile. 2: Took part in most, but not all, and appreciated the community. 3: Regal and refined, thank you. 4: A lot of the bookstores in downtown area closed at 6 pm on Bookseller Night. Perhaps it should be better advertised when the RBS classes are taking place, so that the booksellers could expect many people coming. 5: Very pleased. It gave a great opportunity to meet and relate to other RBSers, and of course the events themselves kept me in the RBS spirit. I also felt no over-arching necessity to attend. 6: I enjoyed all the RBS activities!

9) Did you get your money's worth? Any final thoughts?

1: Some prior conversancy with HTML or other markup language would be an asset, though not essential. 2: Yes. I'd highly recommend it to anyone considering EAD who has institutional support. 3: Very much so. I will be able to make my division rather autonomous in producing FA on XML-Web conversions. Daniel accomplished something I really appreciated. He interpreted a software manual for humanities majors. [He who has ears let him hear.] 4: Yes, I did. I can only highly recommend to take this course for anyone involved in EAD projects. 5: I believe so. I hope my institution agrees. I was hoping for a few more people in the class, although this would have cut into the one-to-one time. I was hoping to hear more about the experiences, projects, and problems of those at other institutions. 6: Yes. I would most highly recommend this course to anyone interested in EAD. This course was a positive experience. I have learned so much -- both the theoretical abstract background necessary to continue any serious thought in this area as well as a complete understanding of implementing EAD applications.

Number of respondents: 6

There were four archivists or manuscript librarians (66%), one rare book librarian (17%), and one general librarian with some rare book duties (17%).

RBS Home