1) How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Very useful. 2: Very. Dard Hunter -- enjoyable and comprehensive. Gaskell -- concise and excellent overview. 3: Yes, they were very useful, though some very difficult to obtain. 4: Good foundation. 5: Good -- nice to have Febvre and Gaskell as alternate perspectives to Hunter. 6: Very useful. A little more clarification in required/recommended readings would have been useful for me. (For instance -- knowing that we would not be held accountable for all details in the recommended readings). 7: I applied late. 8: Very useful; gave a great introduction to the field. 9-10: Very useful. 11: Gave good idea of what course would cover -- could be skimmed for areas of interest/weakness without requiring cover to cover reading, so quite useful. 12: Very useful and organized by various categories.

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. 2: Yes, especially the bibliography. 3: The syllabus was useful as were the booklet of handouts. They will serve as a reference in the future, and the bibliography will be invaluable. 4: Helpful in class...probably not for later except for bibliography. 5: Yes. 6: Extremely useful for reference purposes, and handy to have when illustrations/examples are needed to explain ideas/processes &c. to others. 7: Yes. The class handout was well-organized and relevant to the lectures. 8: Yes -- we referred to the syllabus and related things frequently. The bibliography will be extremely useful for future study. 9-10: Yes. 11: Yes; helped to keep daily topics in larger perspective. 12: Most definitely, offered another viewpoint of paper history (esp. regarding the industry and economics of the paper trade) and provided info. I have not found published.

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

1: Excellent. 2: Yes -- superb balance of commercial and economic history with discussion of technique and analysis. 3: Yes. JB is a walking encyclopedia of paper history. He communicates well and is very thorough, with a nice touch of humor. 4: Yes. High level, challenging, interesting. Much more detailed than library school courses -- great. 5: Yes. 6: Absolutely. Intellectually stimulating, with ample opportunity to ask questions in a friendly and supportive classroom environment. Appreciated instructor's knowledge and ability to answer questions and speak extemporaneously. 7: Yes. The lectures and demonstrations focused on the history of papermaking as well as practical information regarding paper identification. I feel equipped to begin identifying paper. 8-10: Yes. 11: Absolutely. 12: Yes.

4) If your course had field trips, were they effective?

1: Yes! Two great field trips. 2: Yes. Very helpful to have an overview of reference books in the field; a delight to see high points of papermaking. Both the trip to make paper by hand and the trip to the newsprint mill were very useful experiences. 3: The Bear Island tour was excellent. Very useful. Fun too. The afternoon spent making handmade paper from garden plants was a pleasant experience, but not educational, nor particularly relevant to the topic of c18 and c19 paper history. 4: Yes. 5: Eye-opening and worthwhile trip to Bear Island Mill -- hand papermaking good, but I wonder if there was any way we could have made rag paper, since that's what we spent most of the time talking about, not natural fibers. 6: YES! Field trips were invaluable learning experiences, as was our trip to UVa Special Collections. Bear Island Paper Mill tour was the highlight of the week. Thank you so much! 7: Yes. 8: Yes -- it was fun to make paper, and the experience was important for understanding the traditional process. The trip to Bear Island was great for seeing modern papermaking, the needs and practices of the industry, and the process of machine-made papermaking. 9: Yes -- 1) Hand papermaking at a studio was good, but the papermaker did not really seem extremely knowledgeable -- she doesn't make that much paper, apparently. But it was a good exercise. 2) Bear Island paper mill was VERY interesting. 3) Special Collections visit to discuss publications on papermaking was also useful. 10: Yes. In particular, the afternoon spent making paper and the trip to Bear Island supported and reinforced our class discussions. These trips also came at useful points in the course. 11: Very well spent. 12: The tour to the paper mill was fabulous -- the day spent making handmade paper I feel would have been more educational if we had made traditional western paper with a person who makes their living producing handmade paper. Possibly in the future, if someone could come from Dieu Donné or Tim Barrett's assistant (if he is not available).

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

1-3: Yes. 4: Yes, but course and instructor exceeded expectations. 5: Yes. 6: Yes. Class matched my expectations and more! 7-11: Yes. 12: Yes, in every respect.

6) What did you like best about the course?

1: JB is a paper animal! Absolutely encyclopedic; witty; articulate; a terrific instructor. Great classmates, too. Also loved the hands-on hand papermaking day trip. 2: JB's wonderful teaching, especially his superb ability to balance useful statistical analysis and archival research with delightfully well-told anecdotes. His love for his subject shows at every point, and he is wonderfully kind to his students. 3: The expertise of the instructor -- someone who has so thoroughly researched the subject, digested the information and presented it to us in a clear and organized fashion. Excellent slides to illustrate issues and useful tables of data to show trends. 4: Instructor is enthusiastic and devoted to subject; very knowledgeable, excellent communicator. 5: Excellent economic and social history from labor and management perspectives. Good exercise on identifying watermarks. 6: The instructor, JB, and his love of paper, papermaking, and papermaking history. 7: The sequence of the lectures and their relationship to the field trips: making paper by hand, followed by the trip to the paper mill. I also enjoyed the afternoon during which we were introduced to methods for identifying paper and the resource books. 8: The field trips. JB is also an extremely knowledgeable person in papermaking, and a terrific storyteller concerning papermaking history. 9: Instructor was excellent -- knowledgeable, funny, and interesting. He talked about ugly machines and made it INTERESTING -- now that is a real talent! 10: I thoroughly enjoyed everything. JB is an excellent instructor, a mine of information. 11: JB. He didn't just pick out pieces from the reading list -- he gave us results of his own work and research, which is admirable. I was grateful for the social and economic view of paper over and above looking up watermarks and classifications. 12: The variety of topics -- covered a number of issues, and there were good visual examples (i.e. papers to examine and search for watermarks).

7) How could the course have been improved?

1: More (even a bit) on paper science: What pH is, why it's important in paper; what lignin actually is; what range of light is damaging to paper; &c. Also might want to try co-teaching it with a papermaker; that would have improved it even more. 2: Larger classroom. 3: Perhaps the afternoon of garden papermaking could have been substituted with a papermaking stint with a more traditional hand papermaker. A discussion of fiber preparation and how that activity yields the paper's final qualities and properties would have been useful. As the saying goes, "paper is made in the beater." 4: Instead of "alternative" fibers, I would like to see quality, white paper made by hand. 5: Better use of Special Collections time -- I was not as interested in seeing RBS's collection of reference books as I was in seeing more originals of manuals such as Art de Faire le Papier. Also, would have been helpful to have brief discussion of paper chemistry (acid/alkaline), what makes paper strong/weak, &c. Also, if there is any way the class could be held closer to Alderman, that would be great -- I felt isolated from the other classes. 8: I don't know. 9: If there had been a more knowledgeable papermaker for the "making paper" section, it would have helped a bit. 10: It would have been nice to have spent more time on watermark and paper identifications. Perhaps this in-class exercise could be modified to give students more time to examine the papers and consult the resources. 11: You can never be too thin, too rich or have too many samples; RBS has an impressive collection, but one can always improve. 12: Some of the topics might have been better in a different order -- possibly if the class started with first discussing the various types of paper briefly and looking at them -- then going on to their history and in-depth study.

8) 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?

1: Ask students to wash hands after breaks and meals. 2: Materials were handled appropriately. 3: ? Can't think of any. 4: There should be no pens, food or drink on tables when handling the materials -- this was forgotten. 5: Bigger classroom space -- not much room to pass around larger objects or look at objects as a group. 8: None. 9: Excellent and careful handling of all materials at all times, including samples passed around the class. 10: A slightly larger classroom, with more tables and flat surfaces. 11: Some more support material could have been useful for passing papers around -- just pieces of binder's board would do it -- folder stock is too light to be good for passing. 12: Some people in the class did not seem to have prior handling with rare papers -- maybe a brief discussion on proper handling at the start.

9) 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: Bookseller Night: almost everything was closed by the time I got there at 7:30. Quite disappointed. Dinner on Sunday night was excellent. 2: All excellent as usual. 3: Edifying. 4: Sun. dinner -- good food and conversation. I personally was tired after class and would have enjoyed the evening programs more if there had been time to relax and eat dinner beforehand. 5: Did not participate. 6: Good opportunities to meet with students in other classes; and learn more about RBS holdings, programs, &c. Sometimes too much included in a day depending on other activities -- but thank you for including these activities for us! 8: The Monday evening lecture was excellent -- he is a true connoisseur, and his knowledge of his collection and related history is inspiring. 9: All was OK! (The food on Sunday night dinner was quite good, by the way). 10: The activities were enjoyable and varied; excellent, as always. 11: By the end of the day, some physical activity is very welcome, so browsing around to look at things is good -- sitting down again, at least without a break, is not. 12: Might be good to have the hours of the booksellers printed in the Vade Mecum -- some were closed earlier than we thought, once we got there on Tues. night.

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

1: ABSOLUTELY!! It's very difficult (impossible) to find a course elsewhere on this subject. Remember it's a HISTORY class: lots of economics, law and social history as it pertains to paper. 3: Yes! 4: Very worthwhile. 5: You will never quite look at paper the same way again; you will also keep looking at paper in the light. 6: Absolutely got my money's worth -- couldn't be happier and would recommend the RBS experience to anyone and everyone. 7: Yes. I appreciate the amount of work involved in organizing a successful week at RBS. 8: Yes (especially because I didn't have to pay). My advice: come prepared -- having read the suggested readings. Also come with money to spend in Charlottesville's terrific used and rare bookshops. 9: Yes -- it's a great class -- take it! 10: Yes, definitely. This was a wonderful course. Highly recommended. 11: Got every penny back with interest; would definitely recommend the course. 12: Most definitely -- I would recommend this course to anyone without hesitation.

Number of respondents: 12

There were two rare book librarians (17%), two archivists or manuscript librarians (17%), two general librarians with some rare book duties (17%), two full-time students (17%), and four conservators, binders or preservation librarians.

RBS Home