1) How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Very useful. 2: They gave me an opening into some of the topics. In particular, they helped me know something about PN's past scholarly interests. 3: They were useful -- more so if I had read all. :(. Read some while here. 4: Very useful: they gave a lot of detailed background on each subject covered in class and, taken together, an understanding of the principles of the overall approach. 5: They were useful. Contributed to the content of the course. 6: Very useful in assembling a collective idea about evidence (paper, watermarks, printers, &c.) 7: Gave a good idea of the course content as well as the instructor's style.

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: They will serve as a useful outline of the subjects we covered. I found them appropriate during the course and will likely refer to the notebook in the future. 3: Yes -- excellent. Could have used a takeaway bibliography on a couple of topics -- German bib lit, major catalogs (beyond those listed), bib on references to find type of info presented. 4: Yes. 6: I don't think there was a syllabus. Workbook had many useful examples. 7: Yes -- more color plates would have been nice.

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

1: Yes. 2: While the course was a brief survey of subjects that would take years to master, I found the class invigorating as an intellectual environment. 3: The class was exciting as well as challenging. I believe the level of the discussion was accessible to everyone in the class. 4: Yes -- it was challenging. 5: Yes, quite appropriate, and creeping over my head at times, but nonetheless interesting and worthwhile! 6: Yes, very high. 7: Yes.

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

2: The RBS staff and the course instructor selected good didactic materials from Special Collections. It was worthwhile. 3: Yes -- went to Special Collections three times, and it was great to see the principles we were discussing applied to entire works. 4: Yes. 5: If we had not done so, I would have wondered why. The visits were good, instructive, and enlightening. 6: Yes, trips to the McGregor room were interesting for seeing actual examples of what we were covering in class. 7: Yes. Too bad we couldn't actually handle the books, but as they are incunables, this was understandable.

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: Yes. 2: I believe that it did. 3-4: Yes. 5: I believe that it did. 6: More or less, although I didn't realize it would be all about pre-1500, exclusively. 7: Yes.

6) What did you like best about the course?

1: Discussions about paper and format. The emphasis on close, careful, and informative observation of the physical evidence provided by a book, and the interpretation of that evidence. PN was also very open to questions. I appreciate that. 2: PN is so knowledgeable about the field. I did not hear any question from the class that he couldn't answer in detail. 3: Stress on the interrelationship of types of evidence, reviews of strengths and weaknesses of various reference tools, extreme expertise of instructor, emphasis on ways of thinking about books. 4: The detailed searching analysis of aspects of physical evidence through examples illustrated in the workbook. 5: There was nothing I liked best, but the asides, in support of the topics, were always very interesting and entertaining. 6: Listening to the instructor's deep knowledge and his alternative points of view on things. 7: PN taught me not to place blind trust in authority, but to use my own eyes and judgement. Also, PN emphasized that bibliography is not its own system for the sake of the system, but should always bring one back to the object, help us visualize the object, &c.

7) How could the course have been improved?

1: I would like to have read, as preparation, an article or two discussing early typefounding theories -- if such exist. 2: My greatest difficulty is in deciphering early kinds of type. It might be worth spending more time in this area, and it would help if we were given additional reading exercises. 3: I would have liked time outside of class to look over the reference books we glanced over -- perhaps they could be made accessible during breaks. 4: A little more comparative reference to post-1501 printing if only to set, briefly, the characteristics of incunable printing in a wider context (e.g. paper sizes). 5: Perhaps a slightly tighter scheduling for the wide-ranging subject matter. Also, another day or two may have helped. 6: Can't think how. 7: More hands-on, actual experience -- see no. 4.

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?

2: There are no problems. 3: Materials were handled responsibly. 4: They were handled well. 5: Perhaps the materials could have been handled with more care, primarily UVa Special Collections books used as examples. 6: We didn't handle the books.

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: The Monday evening lecture on binding was very interesting. 2: These activities are mostly enjoyable and constitute a large part of the RBS experience. 3: I had a very good time. Study Night was great. Local booksellers had nothing of interest on early printed books this year (I've gotten good stuff before). Breaks were much more enjoyable with fewer people for space compared to other years. 4: All enjoyable; all well organized. 5: I think that it is good/great to have a choice should one have other things one might do, either professionally or for entertainment value. 6: All were enjoyable. Nice to meet and socialize with other RBS students. 7: I usually participate in and enjoy everything.

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

1: Yes. I feel honored to have participated in this course and to have been exposed to exciting ideas, hypotheses, and truly brilliant interpretations of evidence. 2: Yes. 3: Absolutely. Advice: don't worry too much about ability to do or read bibliographical description if you know anything at all. Devote any prep time to readings. 4: Yes, definitely. A good knowledge of the pre-course readings enables one to get a lot more out of the detailed analytical discussion carried out in class. 5: I certainly don't like the package cost, since I paid myself, but it is necessary for my professional development. 6: Yes. 7: This course is exactly as the title describes: a close, careful analysis of evidence.

Number of respondents: 7

There were three rare book librarians (43%), one general librarian with some rare book duties (14%), one general librarian with no rare book duties (14%), one preservation librarian (14%), and one book-collector (14%).

RBS Home