David Whitesell
G-10: Introduction to the Principles of Bibliographical Description
29 July–2 August 2013

 

Detailed Course Evaluation

 

1)    How useful were the pre-course readings? How successful was the advanced use of the videotape, The Anatomy of a Book: Format, as a teaching tool? Please indicate if you applied and were accepted late for the course, and thus did not get the list or video tape in time.

 

1: Bowers, Gaskell, Carter, and Belanger were all very useful for preparation, although it would be great if there was a concise modern alternative to Bowers. 2: Pre-course readings were essential, attempting the course without having read them would have been a disaster. 3: The format tape was helpful. Pre-course reading could have been better targeted—sending the Bowers index from the workbook to students early might help. 4: The Bowers index made Bowers much more accessible. Perhaps provide this ahead of time. Everything else was very useful and easy to set. 5: DW hit the nail on the head Monday morning: bibliography is a language, and DesBib is like an immersion course. I can’t imagine doing this class without a good knowledge of Gaskell and Bowers already in place. 6: The course materials and video were extremely helpful. It really is as helpful to read as much of Bowers as possible. 7: Very useful. 8: Bowers was not explanatory at all to me except in the broadest, conceptual terms. For me, it had little to no instructional use. 9: The readings were critical. The videotape is a terrific introduction. 10: The reading materials are all excellent, but I think that future students would find it more helpful if they were advised to see the videotape first. 11: They were extremely helpful. Pre-course readings were crucial. I wouldn’t have survived the course if I hadn’t done the reading list. 12: The readings were extremely helpful and important. Gaskell helps a lot to understand the evolution and techniques of printing. His definitions of vocabulary words are also extremely helpful when approaching Bowers. 13: Pre-course readings were very useful Bowers chapters five and seven were essential. Videotape was very useful prior to reading Bowers. 14: The pre-course readings were absolutely essential. 15: I am glad I completed all the pre-course readings and additional materials. My reading notes saved me a LOT of time during the homework sessions. 16: The pre-course readings were very useful except for Bowers, which I didn’t understand at all. I would suggest to future students that they start off with the Belanger book chapter, then the DVD, and then Gaskell. Finally, if they have time, look at Bowers, but you could also read Bowers after first day. 17: Advanced reading was as intense as the class proved to be and was an excellent introduction to the concepts that were taught. 18: The pre-course readings in retrospect form a historical backdrop for a discipline very fluid in its analytical realizations. The videotape was useful, but written version more so. 19: Reading ahead of time was essential. Pointing out Bowers Appendix 1 digest of the formula would have been helpful, as would the index we were given in our workbook. 20: The readings were crucial to the material covered in this class. The video was essential for visualizing what was discussed in the readings. 21: Both the video and readings were extremely helpful, and I am glad I stuck with reading the indicated parts of Bowers, though it was tough at times. 22: The readings were appropriate and helpful. The video and materials helped visualize and understand the concept of format. 23: The video and paper folding samples are essential. I read all of Bowers but certainly can’t claim I understand all of Bowers! But would have been completely lost if I tried to do this without having read it. 24: Extremely useful. You cannot get through this course without pre-reading Bowers. An understanding of the history of printing is also essential. The videotape was not particularly helpful, however I have seen it many times before and am already familiar with format. 25: Both Bowers and Gaskell were useful to read ahead of time, though I forgot a lot of Bowers until I had to apply it. The tape is kind of a trip, but I think it’s going to be useful for a folding practice in the future. 26: Pre-course reading was necessary for a successful class. I would recommend that you make available the workbook “signings” document for download to help make key concepts in Bowers more understandable and do a similar document for pagination. The video was OK but not key for me. 27: All were helpful to review before attending the course. Perhaps ask the student to choose a format and create a paper book to demonstrate how it would look—bring it in to the first lab. 28: Absolutely essential. Don’t come without reading everything at least once. 29: I did not view the video in advance. The reading was somewhat dense and at times difficult to conceptualize. However, once the class began the reading made much more sense.

 

2)    Were the syllabus, workbook, exit reading list, and other materials distributed in class appropriate and useful (or will they be so in the future, after you return home)?

 

1: Yes. 2: Excellent. 3: Yes. The exit reading list is a great resource. 4: Yes! 5: Yes, very useful, and will continue to be so. 6: I believe the materials will be extremely helpful—I intend to use the exit reading list to answer all my questions going forward. 7: Very appropriate; I will certainly use this material to handle reference queries. 8: The class workbook was more useful to me. 9: Yes, and yes. 10: All excellent—they will provide great future reference tools. 11: They were well put together. I very much appreciate the exit reading list. 12: Absolutely! I will keep the workbook handy when I leave and have already selected titles from the exit list to begin reading. 13: Syllabus and workbook was useful and appropriate; reading list plus other material will be useful. 14: The workbook was extremely helpful…tips and index to hard-to-find references in Bowers were a life-saver during the week. 15: I already have a place for the workbook in my bookshelf. I appreciate all the work faculty put into the selection of these readings. 16: Yes! Everything was not only appropriate, but extremely useful during the course and after. I would like to thank all the instructors for creating such wonderful tools. 17: Yes, very appropriate, and will prove even more useful day to day. 18: Useful during and in the future. Chaos became codified, and exceptions to the rule much appreciated after the fact. 19: Very much so. 20: All materials that were prepared for the course were very helpful during the week. I plan to reference them often in the future. 21: Extremely helpful and I am sure I will keep this handy for future reference. 22: Everything was excellent. 23: The museum guides will be very useful. So will the other materials, and I’m especially looking forward to having a closer look at the exit reading list—haven’t really had time this week to do more than glance at it. 24: They are useful. The workbook had several errors, but nothing that wasn’t easily remedied. The index to Bowers is definitely the most useful handout! 25: Yes, very. I can’t use the DesBib skills in my current job, but am interested in pursuing it and the materials helped make Bowers and the process easier. 26: Yes, many items included will be useful in the future. 27: Thank you for the attention paid to these details. They all will be immensely useful as a reference. 28: All materials were, and will continue to be, extremely useful. 29: They were useful guides at various times and will definitely be useful later on when looking back at the structure of the week.

 

3)    To what extent did the DesBib Museums and their catalogs contribute to the success of the course? How could they have been improved?

 

1: The Museums were very impressive! They helped diversify the course while also helping me think about future RBS topics of interest. 2: They were fantastic. 3: The museums were wonderful. I would like to see more early cheap and mass print objects added. 4: As a reference librarian who likely won’t collate much for work, the museums were perhaps the richest part. Thank you for providing the descriptions in the spiral notebook. 5: The museums alone would be worth the price of tuition. Translating concepts into reality was a substantial part of the week for me. 6: I thought the museums were great and very well thought out. I wished that there were more direct examples of bindings. 7: Museum sessions are essential. They provided a time line for development (e.g. paper techniques or type setting), putting them in perspective. 8: Museums are the best curated, instructional “vignettes” I have ever seen. 9: The DesBib Museums make the course. It would be great to have access to the accompanying workbook ahead of time as a pdf, to prepare at home. This would allow students to apportion their time in the museum more fruitfully. 10: The DesBib museums are an essential component to the structure of this course. They provide excellent visual (and written) evidence of the things being learnt and taught in the homework and labs. No improvement needed. 11: Paper museum and printing museum were great. There were certain aspects of printing that I never quite understood before attending this class. But it was so easy to understand after museum sessions. 12: Museums are crucial to understanding layout, technique, and overall physical aspects of printing and book production. 13: Museums were very helpful in illustrating lecture and homework. Really rich and organized displays. 14: This was an essential part of experience. Can’t imagine a better way to get up close and hands on with this material; couldn’t be duplicated in a classroom. 15: the museum sessions helped to make sense of all the information rising from lectures and homework. I’m really amazed by the amount of examples I can recall from the museums. 16: I loved the DesBib museums. They helped visualize certain aspects of what we were learning that day. 17: Museums were timely and perfectly illustrative. Improvement possible by allowing more time. 18: The museum was fantabulous and provided the historical data so essential to the analytical aspects. 19: A half-hour guided tour by DW or one of the instructors would have been helpful to start the session, followed by an hour to explore on our own. Having examples out being able to manipulate them invaluable in improving my understanding. 20: The museums and the catalogs provided visual and hands-on experience with many aspects of the book’s creation. They were invaluable, and also provided wonderful breaks from homework! 21: The museums and readings were phenomenal. Two hour seminars rather than one and a half would do them more justice. I  read as much ahead of each museum as possible which was a great help. 22: The museums were excellent. It was nice to handle actual objects and understand how they were used. 23: See answer to question two, and also: I loved the museums. I learned after the first one to look at the catalog ahead of time in order to use the time in the best way. 24: The DesBib Museums are a wonderful tool for visual learners, like myself. The paper folding exercises are wonderful! I think the Museums are essential to this course. 25: They are a little overwhelming and I think I missed some things, but good for seeing examples. And hat-making sessions. 26: They gave materiality to the lectures. DesBib is about structure and physical evidence. The museums helped putting that evidence in context. 27: These were all extremely helpful as an additional learning experience. 28: The museums were amazing, and I can think of no improvements. 29: The museums were a great help in visualizing and making more tangible the ideas put forth in the reading and discussion. Very well organized.

 

4)    How successful were your format-and-collation labs? How effective was your lab instructor in conveying the material to be covered? How could the labs have been improved?

 

Chris Adams (CA) 2: Very successful. A steep learning curve, enlightening and spiritual conversations. 3: The labs were very helpful. As a complete beginner, I would have liked to watch “over the shoulder” of an experienced collator before being thrown into the homework, however. 4: I made lots of mistakes, but I learned from all of them. CA was an excellent instructor: serious and driven but with a sense of humor that was disarming. 5: Labs were great—interactive and engaging. CA was a kind and capable Charon, ferrying us across the Stygian depths of Bowers. James Ascher (JA) 6: I grew enormously over the week. My lab instructor was excellent and I felt like he constructively and thoughtfully answered my questions. 7: Very successful. I like detailed explanation and reasoning. 8: JA is a most knowledgeable, highly skilled, and empathetic teacher. The Best!!!! 9: I was disappointed in my grouping. My lab partners were unprepared, which necessitated a great deal of time being wasted going over material covered in Bowers. I attended RBS in order to consort and mingle with people with different backgrounds and skill sets, to learn from them as well as from my instructor(s). Being grouped with other apples, especially unripened apples, was not helpful. 10: JA is a brilliant lab instructor. He explained everything very thoroughly. His passion for bibliography is contagious. He was encouraging and kind. 11: Labs were the best part of this course. I was very impressed by my lab instructor. He certainly is a very polished and knowledgeable teacher. Vernica Downey (VD) 12: Lab instructor answered all questions, problems, and concerns. It was helpful to talk through evidence and interpret that evidence in the formulas. 13: Very successful labs—very effective instructor. No improvements needed. Instruction was extremely well organized, prepared, and methodical—this helped a lot. 14: The combination of daily homework followed by morning labs was very effective. Our lab instructor, VD, was knowledgeable, friendly, and supportive. She did a great job of explaining some trick materials. 15: The labs provide a great opportunity to discuss the homework while also trying to understand other issues. Haven Hawley (HH) 16: The labs were the best part of this course. I had wonderful discussions with my other colleagues in my cohort and with HH. We all had a lot of questions, which HH answered beautifully, also she kept us calm. 17: Labs were well paced and ideally sized. 18: Very successful. The team members all brought insights unique to their background, enriching discussions and solutions. One couldn’t ask for a better lab instructor—hands-on experience and practical, extensive knowledge. 19: Labs couldn’t have been improved. HH was magnificent and is remarkably gifted at taking difficult concepts and making them comprehensible without dumbing them down or being inaccurate. She was also great at addressing a variety of skill levels in her audience. Loved the small group atmosphere.  20: Labs were designed well as three-student groups. The lab instructor conveyed material well and very thoroughly. 21: Labs were great and we got to all books and every question we had. The instructor was patient and knowledgeable, and I cannot think of any improvements. Eileen Smith (ES) 22: The labs were fine. But sufficient time to eat must be built in somewhere—it’s just not healthy to collate from 3:30 to 10 at night without a break! 23: ES was fantastic to work with—very clear. 24: ES is just a delightful instructor. She made labs fun. She also has a way of making Bowersian theory sensical. 25: Very successful, and very effective. ES took time to show us aspects of the books I’d missed (or deliberately avoided) and explained everything clearly. 27: Our lab instructor was very clear and concise on explaining the collation formulas. She worked with the students on what they each needed to understand. I am very satisfied with how she conducted the labs. No Lab Instructor Indicated 28: Extremely successful: great teaching style and wonderfully small group. Supportive and informative. 29: While I was initially a bit intimidated, the “sink or swim” mentality worked well for me and the chances to discuss our work were great.

 

5)    What aspects of the course content were of the greatest interest or relevance for your purposes? Was the intellectual level of the course appropriate?

 

1: The entire course helped clarify and deepen my knowledge of books as material objects. 2: Excellent foundation for future work, and the Bowers formula as a “language” for bibliographic and analysis really clarifies the observations I make. 3: The descriptive vocabulary and new understanding of the materiality of books I have gained are going to improve and strengthen the project I am working on. 4: I wanted to get into the guts of the books, so it was all relevant. The most intellectually engaging experience that I have had in years. 5: For me, the greatest relevance was explicitly drawing the connection between format and collation and how the book was physically printed and constructed. 6: The most interesting aspects were the paper museum and hands-on collation practice. I thought that the level was right for beginners with some knowledge of collation. 7: Intellectual level was just right, not too easy to feel too confident, but not too way difficult to discourage from further exploration. 8: Book structure and how that reflected limitations of printer and/or materials at hand (economy of book-making). 9: See question four. Too much time spent on the basics. Too bad. 10: I found it all extremely interesting. It has helped me to see books in a whole new way. I was hoping to understand rare books better in order to develop my own special collection, but I now feel inspired to go back over my Ph.D. thesis (on MSS) with a fresh eye and new perspective, and to examine my existing rare book collection with greater scrutiny, perhaps even altering my Collection Development Policy. In short, a transforming course! 11: The intellectual level of the course was appropriate, and I cannot tell you enough how engaging the course contents were. 12: Yes. The homework and labs were most important and interesting for me. However, without the museums, homework and labs may have been hard to do. Museums helped my understanding most. 13: Labs were both of most interest and relevance. We needed the hands on application. Yes, its intellectual level was appropriate. 14: The homework and labs were of greatest interest: an excellent opportunity to work with RBS’s great collections. 15: I really enjoy the focus on bibliography as a discipline. I had the opportunity to practice it and learn about its development and possible future. 16: Yes, the intellectual level was appropriate. I wish we had spent more time going over editions, issues, and states rather than put so much energy into binding. 17: All parts of DesBib are directly applicable to my day to day work. Intellectual level was also just right. 18: When one loves learning, all is relevant. 19: The labs! Yes. 20: The exploration of the book as a physical object—a product of printing—was my interest and my expectations were met. Intellectual level was very appropriate. 21: The level was perfect and really for me all pieces together made this course incredibly relevant. It was the perfect balance of all elements. 22: I needed to understand how to construct collation statements for complex books and now I do! The level was perfect. 23: Format and collation formulas. Yes. 24: I came here to learn collation. The intellectual level is spot on. 25: I wanted to learn the skill and the way of seeing, and feel like I have a very solid start on both and just need to use do more on my own at this point. 26: The process will I think help me look at a book and comprehend what I am seeing. 27: Collation, museum, hands-on nature, and background history in DesBib. 28: We learnt to speak a new language in a week. 29: The intellectual level was appropriate. I particularly enjoyed the “hands-on” nature of the various demonstrations and museums. Placing different printing trends in historical context will be useful for me.

 

6)    What did you like best about the course?

 

1: The mixture of DW’s lectures, the homework exercises, and the museums. 2: The combination of various approaches. As a complex course, it is a polished masterpiece of course-design and pedagogy. I am in awe. 3: The books! The very hands-on nature of the museums and labs appealed to me, and the lectures were a well-timed supplement. 4: Labs and museums. 5: The hands-on experience with books. 6: I liked the opportunity to go over mistakes in my formulas as a learning exercise. 7: Labs. I am a hands-on person. 8: Yes, and more. 9: Museums, hands on the books, and personal attention, especially outside of labs. 10: I like the way it evolved and the way all the parts came together—I think I absorbed a great deal more than I would have done had it just been lectures. Having said that, DW’s lectures were all absolutely wonderful! I also greatly appreciated the chance to look at a rare book directly related to my field. 11: Homework and labs and staying late doing homeworks. 12: Homework: labs. 13: I liked VD’s teaching style the best; she was easy to understand and knowledgeable. 14: DW’s lectures were fabulous! Wished we could have heard more from him.  15: The selection of books was incredible. Each book presented new challenges that really helped me lock in all the content of the course. 16: I really liked everything about this course. DW’s lectures were great; the labs encouraged discussion and learning, and the DesBib museum helped put everything into perspective. 17: The clear definition of heretofore nebulous concepts and processes. 18: The fluidity and creative methodology. 19: The labs! And the printing demo and the ability to play around with the material forms used in type casting and  binding examples. 20: Museums, homework and lab periods. DW’s lectures also provided guidance for the topics at hand. 21: The way theoretical and hands-on played together to heighten the level of understanding. 22: Learning to see and understand how a book was put together. 23: Our lab instructor. The museums. 24: Lab and homework sessions—but I’m an odd duck. 25: Printing demonstration! Also, oddly, homework sessions—they were long, brutal hours but I will miss them. 26: The enthusiasm for bookish pursuit displayed by all staff. 27: Besides being at RBS? Beginning to learn a whole new skill set. Very exciting and rewarding. 28: The care taken in organizing the experience for us. It’s pedagogically extremely impressive. 29: See question five.

 

7)    Did the instructor(s) successfully help you to acquire the information, knowledge, and skills that the course was intended to convey?

 

1: Yes. Although I need more practice! 2: I was thoroughly impressed. 3: Yes. 4: Yes. 5: Yes. CA drew from Bowers and experience to guide the lab participants to insight and conclusion. 6–7: Yes. 8: Yes. 9: Somewhat, but—had to teach down to the lowest common denominator in the room (see questions four and five). 10: The instructor did everything in his power to set me on the right path. I would really like to have further training, however, as this is still a beginning. 11: Yes, absolutely. 12: Absolutely, and more in some instances. 13: Yes—by not overwhelming us but providing enough detail, she was successful. Very clearly conveyed the content. 14: All instructors (and curator) were excellent teachers. Thank you! 15: Yes! DW was great during lectures and the support from the lab instructors was prompted. 16: YES! All of the lab instructors were helpful. And DW was always inquisitive about our work. 17: Yes. 18: Most definitely. 19–20: Yes. 21: Absolutely. The instructor had a wealth of information to share and really brought the topic to life. 22: Yes—great! 23: Yes. 24: The instructors help to parse through the thicket that is Bowersian methodology. I don’t see it as helping to acquire knowledge; more as pointing us in the proper direction. 25: Yes! 26: The instructor would nudge me in a fruitful direction. She expected me to make good use of the hint. 27: Yes! 28: Absolutely. I learnt far more than I thought possible. I’m now confident in this language. 29: Yes, the instructors did a very good job and all seem very intelligent and knowledgeable.

 

8)    Did you learn what the course description/advertisement indicated you would learn? Additional comments optional. Y/N

 

1–4: Yes. 5: Yes. The description is very accurate. 6–10: Yes. 11: Yes, and much more! Exceeded my expectation. 12–14: Yes. 15: Yes. The course was more than what I expected. 16 –20: Yes. 21: Yes. Actually, I learned more than I ever thought was possible in one week! 22–27: Yes. 28: Yes, and more. 29: Yes.

 

9)    Did you learn what you wanted in the course? Additional comments optional. Y/N

 

1–5: Yes. 6–8: Yes. 9: Had hoped for more (see questions four, five, and seven). 10: Yes. But I would like to learn more—an intermediate bibliography perhaps? 11: Yes. 12–17: Yes. 18: Yes, I did not anticipate what I was going to learn, making it all the more exciting. 19: Yes. Would have liked more about how digitization projects can affect bibliography and vice versa. 20–21: Yes. 22–26: Yes. 27: Yes. I did gain the basic knowledge and do need to continue working on what was learned this week. 28: Yes. I knew what I did not know; now I know it. 29: Yes.

 

10)  How do you intend to use or apply the knowledge or skills learned in this course?

 

1: Archival research in book history and print culture. 2: It helped to consolidate my resource skills in the field. I have several years’ experience in working with rare books, done extensive reading on the subject, and I still found it useful and enthralling. 3: Trying to determine make-up of bound serial novels. 4: I wanted to be able to talk about and teach with rare books with the appropriate vocabulary. I will certainly be able to do that now. 5: This has both broadened and deepened my knowledge of DesBib, which I will use in studying and cataloguing my own collection. 6: I intended to interact more knowledgeably at work with my colleagues and vet books for buying and selling. 7: For reference. 8: In evaluating if antiquarian books are complete. 10: Yes, I’m rushing back to my library to examine my rare books. 11: I intend to use it for my own research in bibliography. 12: At work and in future endeavors. 13: Reading and editing descriptive bibliography of material I work with. 14: I will be working on two projects in special collections at my home institution. 15: I will be cataloguing rare books in the near future and I’m in the process of writing a grant proposal to go to Europe to do research for a bibliography. 16: I will use what I learned when reviewing material to purchase, assisting scholars with projects; in teaching courses to students, and with digitization projects. 17: By incorporating the concepts and terms taught directly into the copy I write involving books. 18: In my work. 19: Every day in my work assessing books to acquire for my institution and working with the ones we already have. Perhaps even in a discrete bibliography project?? 20: Understanding our collections; teaching students through instruction sessions and through reference. 21: Evaluate some of our own rare book holdings. Improve their description for records. Incorporate elements of class into instruction sessions for undergraduate students who work in special collections with primary resources. 22: I will use this in the job as I catalog older books. 23: Directly related to my work. 24: More to read than to write. To help with inference questions. 25: I’m going to pursue rare book studies in my library degree and hope to apply this there. 26: I want to use the information to create an online data base. The class will help me decide what information to include and how to record it in a more rigorous manner. 27: It will be very useful in better identifying copies of the same publication. 28: Several projects now seem possible which before were inaccessible. I’ll also start designing courses or classes to pass this on to my students. 29: I plan to practice the skills acquired here while at work and hope it will help me interact with patrons who have questions about bibliographic description.

 

11)  How could the course have been improved? If you have a suggestion for a new course (and—equally important—a person who could teach it), please contact the RBS Program Director.

 

1: A concise modern edition of Bowers’ formula. 3: Would like to see a DesBib focusing on the c19. 4: Maybe five books a day. With six I was at times rushed and overwhelmed. 5: Not sure how to improve it…more hours in the day? 6: I thought more time for homework built into the day would be nice. 8: The video is useful, but it might be useful to introduce an actual deconstruction of a book to demonstrate plainly parts to be collated. 9: Consider grouping students with unlike. I understand that in some cases homogeneity can be useful. For me it was not. 10: Intermediate bibliography—building on the skills. Non-western books. 11: I want to do this course for another week. Could you make it a two-week course? 12: The course was perfect, as is. 13: Maybe an intermediate DesBib course? 14: Not sure. Although the class is large, you spend very little time as a large group; mostly in a small class or even smaller lab sessions: the student to teacher ratio is excellent. 16: I think the course could be improved by giving students one or two easy books in their first box so you can get your feet wet before you move to the harder materials. It would also be nice if we could collaborate in our groups. 17: The DesBib course is just right. I suggest another course that surveys as many other world bibliographic systems as is reasonable as a way to find common ground and perhaps spur a synthesis of systems into a cosmopolitan system. 18: The course presents examples other than Anglo-American. It would be appreciated if more continental background would be included. 19: A course for those in the throws of a bibliographical project—to help overcome hurdles, get inspiration from, bounce ideas off. Basically a practical application course. 20: Perhaps we could have had one or two fewer books for homework as the days progressed. Each day we added new elements to describe—fewer books would have meant more time to thoroughly describe the books. 23: Possibly have somewhere to store our heavy textbooks to save our aching shoulders? 25: More time spent on model-building and other means of visualizing formats (and less on pagination)—that’s what I really need help with. 26: Suggestion in question one above. Collation is time consuming. The key is to get the participants’ power of observation developed before the start of the class. A list of marks and conditions to observe would be good. 27: If possible, for this course to have an additional half day of introduction on what we are to do, or perhaps the introductory session we had Monday morning could be a Sunday afternoon session. 28: Collating six books may not be twice as instructive as collating three. Exhaustion isn’t good for learning.

 

12)  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?

3: None. 4: I did worry about the white board markers around the books—especially finger prints. Not sure how this might be improved. 5: The books for collation have obviously been heavily used, but I like to think that they’re giving their lives for bibliography. 6: N/A. Everyone was very well behaved. 10: No further suggestions. 11: No. 12: Everyone took care of the books and other materials. They were well taken care of and handled properly. 13: No suggestions—worked well as is. 14: We were trusted, immediately, with some delicate materials, but were given basic instruction and everyone seemed careful and followed suggested practice. 15: No problems. 16: Careful with books. 17: This was just right. 18: No suggestions. 20: Perhaps a brief demo of handling for those who were not familiar already. 23: I think we were all clear on safe-handling practices. 24: Well, the materials are the work horses of the collection. They need to be handled. I think the reminders at the beginning of class are the only things that can really be done. 25: All seemed good. There was one book in our box for Thursday (early c18?) that seemed like it was badly bound and stressing out the paper. 28: None.

 

13)  If you attended the evening events (e.g., BS Lecture, Video Night, RBS Forum, Booksellers’ Night) were they worth attending?

 

2: I attended two excellent lectures. Booksellers’ Night was a great opportunity, too. 4: No real time. Booksellers’ Night was interesting. 5: The few evening events I attended were a welcome and informative break from hours of collating! 6: Yes—Scott Clemons’ (SC) talk on Aldus Manutius was really amazing. 7: Absolutely yes. Not only informative but highly entertaining content, well-presented. 8: Yes, especially SC’s lecture. 10: N/A. 11: Yes. 12: Booksellers’ Night was great fun. Didn’t make it to the other events because of homework. 13: No time; but attended in previous years. 14: I didn’t attend…homework got in the way!! But I have attended as part of other courses of RBS, and the lectures and forums are been great. 15: I couldn’t go to any of the events. 16: I attended the RBS Lecture on the ESTC and it was fantastic. 17: Yes. 18: Yes. 19: Only got to Booksellers’ Night, but it was wonderful. 20: Monday night lecture was great! 21: Could not attend due to homework. 22: Yes—very interesting and informative. 23: Even though I felt like I did not have time (homework), I did go to both the Monday and Wednesday lectures. I regretted that on Monday but really enjoyed the Wednesday lecture. 24: I attended SC’s lecture Wednesday night and found it enjoyable. 25: The lecture on Manutius was interesting, the ESTC lecture less relevant for me. 26: Lectures were good. I only got to one bookseller before they closed. 27: The RBS Lectures are an added bonus. 29: Yes.

 

14)  Did you (or your institution) get your money’s worth? Would you recommend this course to others?

 

1: Yes to both. 3: I feel like I got my money’s worth. I would certainly recommend the course and/or RBS itself. 4: Yes, and yes (although next time I hope to have support from somewhere). 5: Worth every penny. I would unhesitatingly recommend this course to any serious collector. 6: Yes, and yes. 7: Yes. 8: Yes, RBS has always been a positive experience—professional and educational for me. 9: Yes, with caveats. 10: Yes, and yes! 11: Absolutely! It was worth travelling 10,000 miles to get here. 12: Absolutely, a wonderful, inspiring, and well taught course! 13: Yes; yes, I’d recommend taking it early on in RBS attendance or career. 14: Yes, and yes! 15: I would totally recommend this course to anyone interested in bibliography. 16: Yes! 100% I would recommend this course. 17: Yes, absolutely will recommend the course. 18: Yes. 19: Absolutely, no doubt, and more. 20: Yes, and yes! 21: Absolutely. I will be raving about class for a long time. 22: Yes. Absolutely. 23: Yes, and yes! 24: Oh yes. 25: Yes, yes, yes, yes. 26: Yes, I will return. 27: Yes, I would recommend this course to others. 28: Absolutely: excellent value. 29: Yes, I think so. I would recommend RBS.

 

15)  Any final or summary thoughts, or advice for other persons considering taking this course in a future year? (If you have further praise/concerns, please speak with Amanda Nelsen or Michael Suarez.)

 

1: For future students: Follow the advice and do all the advanced reading. 2: Thanks! 4: This course is exhausting. Don’t take it unless you are prepared to dedicate yourself to the readings and the five days at a full tilt.  6: This course is intensive and introductory—expect to spend long hours but to walk away with concrete and applicable knowledge.  9: Please, please, please—DO THE READINGS. 10: This is an excellent course which will give you a whole new appreciation of books. It is not an easy course, and you may feel frustrated with it in the first couple of days, but all will make sense in the end. 12: Don’t get too intimidated by Bowers, it all becomes crystal clear by the time you actually pick up a book, and talk with an instructor! 13: Advice: do the readings. The course is really well organized and designed. Comments: I wished I had taken this earlier in my career with rare books. DW is an excellent and humorous an extremely knowledgeable instructor—pedagogically speaking, course was effectively well designed. 14: Come prepared for a few days of hard work. And do the reading. Then read it again!! Really! 15: I’m coming back for sure! 16: I had a great time at RBS and in DesBib. This course is a great base to build your rare books knowledge. 17: Prepare yourself at least as far as RBS suggests and you’ll get even more out of your course than you hope. 18: None. 19: The rumors you’re heard are true—it’s a very intense course. But also invaluable. 20: A wonderful immersion experience! 21: Do all the preparatory readings. It will be worth it. Things will start to click once you practice the hands-on lab and homework. Do not be intimidated if Bowers seems confusing at first. 22: It’s tough—but you will learn what you need to learn! 23: Like the preliminary advices say, please don’t try to do this class without doing the readings. Bowers is beyond dense, but don’t panic—it will make more sense once you’re here and actually working with books. 24: Read Bowers. The book is not discussed in class before we start on homework. Also, every one is wonderful. The lab instructors are extremely knowledgeable (of course) and the time they spent preparing for and working in this class is appreciated. 27: Monday morning could begin with “simple” collations in order to build some DesBib skills before diving into more complex collations. 28: Prepare and be ready to work.

 

Aggregate Statistics

 

Number of respondents: 29

 

Leave

Institution gave me leave: 17 (59%)

I took vacation time: 5 (17%)

N/A: self-employed, retired, or had summers off: 7 (24%)

 

Tuition

Institution paid tuition: 13 (44%)

I paid tuition myself: 8 (28%)

N/A: self-employed, retired, or scholarship: 8 (28%)

 

Housing

Institution paid housing: 13 (45%)

I paid for my own housing:  12 (41%)

N/A: stayed with friends or lived at home: 4 (14%)

 

Travel

Institution paid travel: 14 (49%)

I paid my own travel: 12 (41%)

N/A: lived nearby: 3 (10%)

 

Which one category most closely defines what you do for a living, or why you are at RBS? (Please check only one category)

 

Antiquarian bookseller: 3 (10%)
Archivist: 1 (3%)
Book collector: 2 (7%)
Cataloguer, Law: 1 (3%)
Cataloguer, Special Collections: 2 (7%)
Student, M.L.I.S.: 2 (7%)
Student, Ph.D. (humanities): 2 (7%)
Librarian with no rare book duties: 2 (7%)
Librarian with some rare book duties: 4 (14%)
Library assistant/clerk: 1 (3%)
Rare book librarian: 4 (14%)
College, assistant professor: 1 (3%)
University, assistant professor: 1 (3%)
Appraiser: 1 (4%)
Historian: 1 (4%)
Editor: 1 (4%)

 

How did you hear about this course?

 

RBS website: 7 (24%)
Work colleague: 9 (32%)
Word of mouth: 10 (34%)
RBS faculty or staff recommendation: 1 (3%)
Previous RBS Courses: 2 (7%)