1) How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: The readings were good for reviewing my thinking about descriptive bibliography after more than a year and a half since I completed the introductory course. 2: The two books (Bowers/Gaskell) were critical. The additional readings were excellent, giving me numerous ideas for my own work as well as a useful summary of bibliography historiography. Some of the readings were very hard to locate, and a few items couldn't be gotten by ILL in time for the class, unfortunately. 3: Readings were very useful, although in some cases where the method being suggested by author of the article differ from what Instructor wanted us to follow, it would have been useful to know that ahead of time. 4: Very useful. In many cases, absolutely necessary as preparation for the course. 5: Necessary and very interesting -- not only for work done specifically in class and labs, but for discussing ideas with classmates during breaks and after class. 6: Excellent. 7: Essential.

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: They will become part of my library when I return home. 2: The materials were good examples for thought, but the supplement (priceless) readings will be more useful for future work. The syllabus was accurate. 3: Yes. 4: Very useful. In certain cases, they will be consulted regularly once I return to work. 5: I am certain to refer to many of the readings and handouts. 6: Very useful. 7: Syllabus.

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

1: Lead by the instructor's vast knowledge and serious demeanor, and completely reinforced by attentive professional attendees, the intellectual level of the class was right without becoming oppressive. 2: Yes. Generally like a grad-level seminar. 3: Yes. 4: Very appropriate. 5: Yes. 6: Most appropriate. 7: Yes.

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

1: We had one use of the McGregor (Special Collections room) and it was interesting. The Hinman Collator was demonstrated. 2: I had seen the Hinman collator and other apparatus before. The talk by David Vander Meulen was a nice opportunity to discuss a topic from our supplementary readings with the author. 3-4: Yes. 5: N/A. 6-7: Yes.

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: There were no major variances. 2-4: Yes. 5: Yes. I thought we might spend more time on additional elements in descriptive bibliography, but it was necessary to spend the time discussing and working out complicated and subtle issues in difficult books. 6: Yes, although with some aspects emphasized. 7: Yes.

6) What did you like best about the course?

1: The hands-on labs using real old books from the RBS laboratory collection were the best part of this class -- as it was at time with the introductory class. 2: RN is a teacher who deals well with both experienced students and with those who aspire but have difficulty at advanced levels. He was supportive and gave me ideas for my own research. He paid attention to the particular needs of each student. 3: Opportunity to spend a week learning and discussing issues with others in field, something I don't get back at home institution. Opportunity to learn from someone with much experience in field. 4: Collating. 5: Homework -- getting my nose in the books and having time to really investigate them. 6: Fine instructor; chance to work closely with relevant and challenging materials; interaction with others with similar bibliographical interests. 7: Homework/lab discussions.

7) How could the course have been improved?

1: I think some laboratory assignments might be tackled in pairs or in consultation with a team. It might then be possible to look at more (or harder) books. 2: I really needed a repeat of the Intro to DesBib to get back into the swing of doing descriptions and to perform at the high level of this class. I would like a separate seminar where students have time to do complete descriptions -- it would take a full week for that class. 3: For me, too much time was spent in solitary work -- homework sessions in which I couldn't ask questions or discuss what I was finding or not finding. I had hoped for more active discussion opportunities with fellow students. Working on the descriptions alone, in silence, and not able to discuss until the lab and then there wasn't much time. Also never being able to hear what the other group had found was disappointing. Other group was apparently much more active. Would have learned from them. I believe we were probably grouped by skill level, but as such I don't feel I was as challenged or learned as much from my group's discussions. Would advise mixing skill levels a bit more -- helps you learn. 4: More collating with even more difficult collating. 5: Make it a semester :). 7: Have one book of each format disbound to unfold sheets -- actual artifact is better than Xerox sheets to fold.

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: There was some wear and use of the laboratory materials, but all were handled with enough care so as to survive for many more "DesBib" courses. 2: Remind students not to use pen in class. Perhaps a list of guidelines, as all Special Collections have, to remind us of proper handling? Vast majority of class took care with materials. 3: Keep a much closer eye on how the students handle the materials! We had one student who handled the material very roughly and would not heed other students instructions or requests to handle the books better. Upsetting to all of us. 4: Possibly, a class should be given a very quick speech on the fundamental precautions we should take when handling rare materials. I know from experience not everyone is careful.

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 social aspect of RBS was diminished during this Spring week -- the University was on break and the number of RBS attendees was diminished from summers. But it was still the best part of the experience. 2: The Monday Night lecture was nice. Students generally seemed subdued -- didn't stay much for the socials. I took opportunity to peruse RBS and UVa resources at all times, and perhaps others did, too. Bookseller Night -- browsed at one shop -- graciously stayed open for us. 3: Unlike the first time I attended RBS (last summer) this time I was able to attend almost all evening events and felt it really did enhance my RBS experience. 4: For a first time participant, these were enjoyable. The second time around, events such as Bookseller Night wasn't as interesting. 5: Videos were interesting -- although sound quality was poor on a couple. The lecture was fantastic. The Sunday lecture and dinner were great. 7: [Sunday night dinner, evening lectures, Study Night, Video Night] were the best.

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

1: Get ready to apply yourself for the week, but expect to feel a sense of satisfaction at the end. As with all other RBS courses -- this is my fifth -- I got more than my money's worth. 2: RBS is worth twice the price, though I couldn't afford it if so. I took out a student loan -- a very good investment. 3: Yes. 4: More than my money's worth. 5: Absolutely. Advice: read widely, come ready to discuss. 6: 1) Yes. 2) Do the reading in advance. 7: Absolutely.

Number of respondents: 07

There were four rare book librarians (57%), two full-time students (29%), and one book-collector (14%).

RBS Home