1) How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Very much, even though I had already read some of them previously. 2: Useful, but not essential, as the instructor provided a very concise survey of the different aspects himself. 3: Very useful background. It would have been more difficult to understand class explanations without them. 4: Useful in a general way. 5: Good introduction esp. in Bischoff. 6: Two out of three -- the two that emphasized actual codices. 7: Moderately useful.

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 useful for the course and, arguably, more useful for future reference. 2: Yes, very much so. 3: Yes -- bulkpack needs to be updated and redone in color with clearer explanations. 4: Yes. 5: Yes. I appreciate bibliographies especially so that I can follow up later. 6: Yes; will refer to the handouts in doing cataloging. 7: Yes, very useful.

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

1: Yes. 2: Yes, ranging from a general introduction for beginners to very detailed scholarly examination and interpretation. 3: Very. 4: Yes, though the students had very different levels of background knowledge. 5: Yes. The more medieval history one knows already, the more you will learn from this class. 6-7: Yes.

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

1: Definitely. 2: Very much so. We had the chance to see and examine a large number of MSS both with respect to aspects discussed in the class and new problems. 3: Absolutely. 4-5: Yes. 6: Yes, very. Library of Congress session in particular quite instructive. 7: Extremely.

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?

1-2: Yes. 3: Yes, but not enough attention was paid to paleography, as promised in course description. [Paleography is not mentioned in the course description. -- Ed.] We read a whole book about it but never covered it. 4: Yes. 5: I think so. 6-7: Yes.

6) What did you like best about the course?

1: The content and the professor, equally. 2: The opportunity to follow AD's studies of different aspects (ruling, quire composition) of MSS and to understand the methods of his research, thus being enabled to see how the physical makeup of a MS can be related to textual history. 3: The hands-on experiences with medieval research catalogues and original MSS. Simple techniques can be applied to texts. 4: AD: the opportunity to work with this outstandingly brilliant (and very friendly) figure. 5: AD is such an expert and a wonderful person. The highlight of the week was the way in which he just looked at a manuscript at Library of Congress and could tell the librarian something that he hadn't seen before (namely, that the illustration had been added in the c19-20)! 6: Sharing in the experience of the instructor -- very remarkable scholar. 7: AD: both style of teaching and material covered, and his impressive command of the subject. "Hands-on" aspect; i.e. being able to handle/inspect materials closely. Visit to Library of Congress and Folger collections.

7) How could the course have been improved?

1: N/A. It was ideal. 2: Make it larger and base it in a MS collection with previously unexamined holdings, for which descriptions could be prepared. 3: Perhaps a brief outline of topics to be covered (even if flexible). Professor did too much talking at Library of Congress -- more student participation needed. 4: Either by extending the length of instruction each day or by assigning further exercises in the evening. 5: I wished that we could have learned something about scripts. It seemed unnatural to leave that out because there is another course (paleography) on it. 6: Integrate some paleography if possible. 7: No specific recommendations. A huge amount of material was (ambitiously) tackled -- this could almost be two courses, divided into humanist and medieval periods.

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: None. 2: No problems encountered. 3: Don't meet in a room with flourescent light. Use trays to pass MSS around. 5: Instructions should be given for how to handle the materials. 7: No specific suggestions.

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 tour wasn't much. I don't need or care to know about the antics of UVa undergraduates. 2: Only participated in the lecture and Bookseller Night. Lecture could have started later -- as could have Video Night; we got back too late from the field trip to participate. Not many booksellers were open Tuesday night. 3: Tour: excellent. Dinner: Not enough food for price charged. I asked for a receipt but was given the run-around -- had to come back three times. 4: The Archimedes lecture, according to one's taste, was either vastly entertaining and informative -- or patronizing but informative. Bookseller Night is not unreservedly to be recommended -- perhaps one ought to visit the bookstores downtown when more of them, and the larger ones, are open. I would recommend conducting one's own research in the evening rather than participating in the group activities. 5: All of these were enjoyable. 6: Evening lecture a real high point. 7: Over scheduled; do Bookseller Night on an evening when more booksellers (and other stores) are open in downtown area. Monday evening lecturer very good.

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

1: Yes. A wonderful learning experience directed by a master of his craft. 2: Yes. People should arrive earlier than I did (Sunday night). 3: Very much so. I highly recommend this course for librarians and professors who are open to new experiences and some nice surprises. 5: The quality of RBS courses cannot be surpassed. It is such a privilege to learn in a small group from such a knowledgeable teacher. 6: Yes. 7: Very worthwhile.

Number of respondents: 7

There were three teachers or professors (43%), one rare book librarian (19%), one general librarian with some rare book duties (19%), and one full-time student (19%).

RBS Home