1) How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: The course readings were the basis for lectures. Reading them prior to class was crucial, however, because otherwise the information would have been too concentrated to absorb in either just reading or just attending class. 2: Extremely useful. 3: Very important and very comprehensive. 4: Quite useful. One would have been lost without at least a rudimentary understanding of the lithographic process as well as relief and intaglio processes. 5: Pre-course reading list was extensive, and I did not get to everything on it, but what I read was helpful and relevant. The list will be an excellent resource for additional reading.

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: Reading list very helpful prior to class and, I expect, in developing courses that deal with lithography. The syllabus was helpful in letting one know which materials to review for the next day's lesson. 2: All very useful. 4: The chine collé handout will prove useful, as many in class were just introduced to how chine collé was applied. 5: Yes.

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

1: Yes. Very solid historical method with cautious speculation when appropriate. 2-5: Yes.

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

1: Yes -- I'd never seen the items we were shown, and having a specialist walk us through the selections aided my understanding of the examples. MT also encouraged us to bring our "Bookseller Night" purchases in for class consultation -- quite interesting. 2: Yes -- was a good supplement to our course of study; was a very informative demonstration of lithography. 3: Yes. 4: Yes. Our trip to Special Collections reinforced processes we discussed all week. It also gave us the opportunity to examine physically examples that would be difficult to find elsewhere. Our trip to see Russell Richardson creating lithographs was essential to understanding the chemical process of lithography. 5: Enjoyed both the trip to Special Collections and visit to artist's studio. Trip to studio might have been better if the artist had been informed of what our class was all about prior to our visit.

5) What did you like best about the course?

1: MT's vast knowledge of technical processes and printing practices, and his ability to convey details in class and our pre-course readings in an engaging speaking or writing style. I feel like I got two weeks' worth of course in one while still enjoying the class tremendously. 2: Wonderful teacher, very well illustrated with slides. Was very impressed by his immense knowledge and scholarship -- feel very much more informed and have a much greater appreciation of lithography. 3: The perfect combination of lecture and hands-on examination of primary materials. 4: I most enjoyed the mixture of lecture with hands-on examples. The slides helped me visualize the lecture points, but actually being able to examine the various lithographic processes under loups and scopes was essential. MT is an exceptionally kind and sensitive instructor as well as being the expert of this field. 5: The encyclopedic knowledge of the instructor. Lectures were well-organized with good slides. Enjoyed spending time with samples of lithography both from RBS's collection and the instructor's personal collection. Liked small size of class and the diversity of people's backgrounds.

6) How could the course have been improved?

1: N/A. 2: I enjoyed all aspects of the course -- could not suggest any improvements. 3: Two days longer, and less breaks. 4: I wish we could have had more time spent on music printing and ephemera, but I would not have liked to give up our hands-on time in Special Collections to provide this. 5: See answer to number four.

7) 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: Some cradles in class for the very few books we used. 2: Thought materials were very carefully stowed and handled. 3: Adequate handling of materials. 5: Class was respectful of material. Probably should have asked people to only use pencils while material was out on tables.

8) If you attended the Sunday and/or Monday night lectures, were they worth attending?

1: Yes -- all lectures good. Monday lecture was too long and began meandering, though it was informative. Thursday lecture was brilliant. 2: Yes, definitely. 3: I, personally, couldn't get enough of them. 4: All the lectures were informative and engaging. 5: Wasn't in Charlottesville in time to attend Sunday lecture, but I enjoyed both Monday and Thursday lectures.

9) If you attended Study Night, was the time profitably spent?

1: Staff explained exhibits -- I found exhibits less useful until explanations began (bookbinding and Linotype). 2: Yes. 3: Yes, good networking, but it was too short. 10:00 is better for me, or even 11:00. I was always up until 1 am reading and writing. 5: Did not attend Study Night because most of the materials I would have wanted to study were in room in Garrett Hall, which was not open.

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

1: Absolutely worthwhile course. Do readings in advance and have good background in printing processes to get most out of class. Sit next to someone with an entirely different skill than yours to share ideas about prints you examine. 2: Yes, definitely. 3: Money's worth; yes -- the more you know the material, in the reading list, the better the course is. 4: This course was more than worth the cost. 5: Absolutely got my money's worth (or more accurately, my institution's money).

Number of respondents: 05

There was one general librarian with no rare book duties (20%), one full-time student (20%), one book-collector (20%), one curator (20%), and one individual who did not specify an occupation (20%).

RBS Home