1) How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Useful -- they provided a good starting point. 2: Very useful. 3: Good material, but personally I think we could have done more practical preparation before the class. 4: Very helpful. 5: Very good and interesting background. 6: They were useful. Although technical, they prepared me conceptually to deal with in-class materials. 7: Very useful. The readings gave me the vocabulary and general concepts so we could move rather quickly. 8: Very useful. 9: Useful in introducing the concepts. However, since most of the readings were guidelines for markup, their implications (and usefulness) were not entirely clear until our class sessions. 10: Pre-course readings were a great addition. Very well written. 11: Fairly useful. 12: Very: provided vocabulary background that was absolutely necessary.

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, they were (and will be) useful. 2: Yes. 3: a) Hard copy material was useful, though I'm not sure how much I will use them in future, especially since: b) all the materials seem to be available on-line (and other even more important materials; perhaps this is the most beneficial aspect of this course). 4: Very appropriate and useful -- generally hardcopies of materials already available on the class Web page. 5-6: Yes. 7: Yes, we received many tools that we can use in creating electronic texts. 8: Yes. 9: Both! Although more so after I leave. 10: Very well done. 11: Yes. 12: Ditto.

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

1-2: Yes. 3: Perhaps one or two of the sessions in the first and second day were too basic -- I felt that anyone who needed the "gentle introduction" level was unlikely to follow the rest of the course. From about midway through the second day, I thought the level was just right. 4: Excellent. (Instructor had ability to teach "one-room-schoolhouse" [style] to a group of varied preparation and personality.) 5-6: Yes. 7: Yes, just right. 8-9: Yes. 10: Great for everyone I think. Taught to a wide range of levels. 11-12: Yes.

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

1-2: Yes. 3: Perhaps not so much for me personally, though most of my fellow students were very interested in scanning, digital imaging, &c. I think we should have seen the original manuscripts we worked on earlier. (Before Mary McCaskill spoke to us.) 4: Yes. Visits to Etext Center and to Special Collections were among the highlights of an over-the-top course. 5: It was wonderful to see all the devices involved. Also wonderful was the opportunity to compare the physical letter with the virtual letter. We got a peek at the past and the present. 6: Yes -- in my case, seeing the actual letter I was working on was interesting intellectually and useful practically. 7: Yes, we visited Special Collections to view the original Civil War letters that we were describing. 8- 12: 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?

1-3: Yes. 4: Yes -- very close correspondence. 5-12: Yes.

6) What did you like best about the course?

1: I best liked the practical nature of the course. I came here wanting to be able to produce and disseminate XML documents and that's what I learned (and many other things, too). 2: Hands-on and sharing of tools and resource information. 3: 1) The instructor was constantly informative, energetic, and interesting. 2) Practical work on mockup and stylesheet transformation. 4: Having the expert and realizing that he was also a master teacher. 5: The instructor -- very smart, very patient, very funny and able to explain technological concepts in English. He made the course a real pleasure. 6: I liked the fact that we worked on manuscripts -- they present a variety of issues. I also liked seeing some of the actual workings of the Etext Center. 7: The exercises. It was very useful to take an electronic text from start to finish and use the TEI/XML concepts that we were learning about. 8: The possibilities of the XML and TEI for the Web. 9: In addition to providing an introduction to the concepts and uses of TEI, we were provided with a toolset that can be used almost immediately upon return. 10: Hands-on experience. Having an actual project helps. 11: The relaxed atmosphere and the knowledge I learned. 12: Instructor is a "Primary Source" in this area; his enthusiasm carried over.

7) How could the course have been improved?

1: I really do not believe it could be improved. 3: Perhaps, though I know this might be difficult, have a way of starting the mockup projects before the start of the course, and use the first day for questions arising from that experience. 4: If the Brand letters continue to be used, Mary McCaskill's visit could be more constructive. She needs to expose her editorial principles. She has no reason to apologize for anything and every right to project confidence in what she is undertaking. 5: I don't think it could have. It was great as is. Really great. 6: As always, there is never enough time to do everything one wants to do. From my point of view, there are no major improvements needed. 7: Do not have the great-granddaughter of the letter writer speak to the class. She did not add anything useful, and she was too emotionally involved with the content. 8: Add about 10% more hands-on. 9: More sample stylesheets could have been provided; e.g., the exact XSL docs currently used on the Brand site to produce original and modernized transcripts. In addition, links to other sample stylesheets would come in handy for those of us unable to take the next class. 10: Great the way it is.... 11: N/A. 12: I'm not sure what could possibly be cut out, but there is almost too much information to cover in the allotted time span. (I know, I know, those "ignorance courses....")

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: No suggestions. 3: N/A. 4: Do you ever enforce your no eating/drinking in computer classrooms? 5: The staff at Special Collections was very careful and gentle -- and made sure we were too. 6: I had no problem with the handling of the physical materials. 7-8: N/A. 9: None. 11-12: N/A.

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: Everything was very enjoyable. While I was not able to participate in all the activities (because of my own time constraints), I did appreciate having the evening activities as a social option. RBS staff were all very kind and enjoyable to be around. They treated us royally. 3: I was living at home in Charlottesville, and unfortunately was not able to attend any of these events. 4: The generosity of faculty attending these impressed me greatly. I also got the impression that my instructor wisely used Sunday evening to see what kinds of students he had gotten. He very systematically "worked" the room. 5: The lectures were really fascinating. 6: The Sunday night dinner was fun and useful -- a nice intro to people. I enjoyed video night, because I wouldn't have gotten this experience elsewhere. Did not participate in other activities. 7: Both the Sunday dinner and the Monday lecture were great. I did not attend the other activities. 8: I enjoyed every program in the evening and would highly keep them for other/next time. 9: Evening lectures, Study Night, Video Night -- as usual -- the high points of an intellectually rigorous week. It is invaluable to have multiple opportunities to put one's classwork (esp. for the technical/computing classes) into a broader context. 11: The Sunday night dinner was okay, but given the small number of people, are "real" plates and silverware too much to ask? Also, the Book Arts Pressroom is too small for comfort. 12: Study Night was good, as I was able to see the other materials appropriate to the other classes.

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

1: I definitely got my money's worth. Anyone considering taking an RBS course should do so. My only regret is that I didn't do this sooner. 2: Yes, definitely. 3: Yes. I would certainly recommend this course to anyone interested in XML. Well worth it. 4: I got my dean's money's worth by 3:30 pm, Monday. For several years, I'd had my eye on "Electronic Texts and Editing." As a result, my expectations were very high. They were met x5. 5: I got more than my money's worth -- thank you. This is a good stretch for the brain and a lot of fun. It makes you rethink the concept of a book or document -- because it's the content and not the physical object that is a book or document. And this course shows how many unthought-of possibilities there are for that content. Really neat! (And good in combo with the EAD course -- encode the objects then learn to describe them.) 6: Yes, I got my money's worth. Advice for future participants -- read course readings, follow TB's travel advice, prepare to work hard, check out Charlottesville, stay at the Lawn (depending on season), and ask questions in class! 7: Definitely worth the money. DS is extremely good at what he does and is a great teacher, too. He deserves great credit for his job. 8: Have software available for purchase? Have class often during holidays. 9: Yes. 10: Very much so. A great intro course. 11: I absolutely feel like I got my money's worth and I would (and will) highly recommend RBS to colleagues. 12: YES I DID.

Number of respondents: 12

There were four general librarians with no rare book duties (36%), two teachers/professors (16%), one archivist/manuscript librarian (8%), one general librarian with some rare book duties, one Web librarian with archiving responsibilities (8%), one project director for a three institution, grant-funded, collaboration, one Web developer/project manager at a non-profit organization (8%), and one Information Technology and Web developer (8%).

RBS Home