1) How useful were the pre-course readings?

2: The "recommendations" did not seem to be used in the class at all. 3: I did not have access to these sources before the course. 4: Helpful.

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: Syllabus was sent several weeks in advance, which was helpful. Searching problem sets should have space between items to record search strategy/results. 2: Very useful; the material will be on my desk and consulted for a long time to come. 3: In class. 4: Yes.

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

1: Very high. Challenging but not intimidating. 2,4: Yes.

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

1: We spent about 30-35% of time searching in the reference room/stacks. Great, but could have used more time. I did spend some after-hours time, which was fine. How about making part of the problem sets "homework" as in DesBib course? 2: N/A. 3: Some books were not available. The time would have been better spent if the professor would have lectured in the library classroom and had the books while he was talking and then passed them around and we could have done the problem sets as a group and discussed them.

5) What did you like best about the course?

1: The time spent in the actual searching was most valuable for me. 2: Well-tailored to my needs in my job. 3: American sources. 4: Broad scope of the material surveyed. International perspective.

6) How could the course have been improved?

1: Possible new course name: "Intensive Bibliographical Searching/Research." Increase actual searching practice time. Require both print and online searching for items. Some people seemed to focus on one or the other according to personal comfort level and missed out on benefits of the other strategy. 2: Perhaps a little more time could have been spent searching, and a little less in class reviewing the bibliographies. A paper trail, from citation to anecdote about the author, e.g., could have been useful. 3: The course should be divided into two sections: 1) British and American literature, 2) foreign language literature. The foreign language sources are totally irrelevant in my setting and I have no background in foreign languages. A more in-depth approach would be beneficial for people interested in both areas. 4: Could have had some discussion and practice of further levels of rare book research beyond library citations. Discovering context, importance, history of particular works.

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

1: Yes. 2: I'm not sure what Monday's speaker was trying to say.

8) If you attended Museum Night, was the time profitably spent?

1: Yes. I saw new toys this time. 2: Yes; of especial value to me was the material on chromolithography.

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

1: Absolutely. Tremendous effort makes this school function on a high level. Request: on the name tags, could you make the first name as large (or larger) than the last name? I can see the last name on the tag from 2-3 feet away, but can't read the first name. 2: I believe so. 3: I did not feel that I got my money's worth because of the amount of time spent on foreign sources and because the searching time was not sufficiently structured. 4: Well worth it. Thank you.

Number of respondents: 04

There were one general librarian with some rare book duties (25%), one antiquarian bookseller (25%), one library director (25%), and one individual with an avocational interest (25%).

RBS Home