16. Introduction to Electronic Texts

10-14 July 1995

An exploration of the research, preservation, and pedagogical uses for electronic texts. Topics include: finding and evaluating existing etexts; the creation of standards-based etexts and related digital images; SGML tagging and conversion (especially the Text Encoding Initiative Guidelines and HTML); publishing on the World Wide Web; text analysis tools (including PAT); electronic text centers and the management and use of online texts.

1. How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: The list was a little overwhelming -- and some of the specific ma-terial available via UVa's etext was hard to identify. Perhaps this could be copied or moved in the future to a file called new RBS readings, or something like that. 2: Very useful. I did not feel quite as at sea as I might have, because we covered the material in class and some of the online reading was distributed in print versions in class. 3: Extremely useful (in fact, essential). 4: Very, though it was evident that not all class members actually did the reading. 5: Quite useful, especially the core documents listed. Prior time spent online was frequently more helpful than some of the texts, which are more useful as reference documents. 6: Very useful -- got overview of subject area before arriving. 7: Very. 8: Moderately useful. They provided a general background against which the course subsequently developed. 9: For the most part the readings were helpful, and it was useful to have them on view. As a novice in the field, I had problems with some of them -- a list of acronyms would be helpful in the future. 10: Readings were useful but somewhat intimidating. They allowed one to become familiar with SGML vocabulary. 11: Very -- a good overview and in-depth analysis. 13: A bit useful. Some were overwhelming. 14: Very helpful. Without them, I would have been lost. Make more emphasis that it's okay to read only the ``You should read these'' sublist.

2. Did your instructor prepare sufficiently to teach THIS course? Were the course syllabus and other materials distributed in class useful?

1: Yes. I would like to get a paper copy of the TEI-LITE guidelines (knowing, of course, that they're subject to change!). 2: Very well prepared. All materials presented in class were very useful. 3: Yes -- exceptional preparation, as well as tremendous sensitivity to needs as they developed. 4: Yes, yes. 5: Oh, yes, the handouts and reading list will be very helpful in building on what we learned in class. 6: Course handouts were of two kinds: 1) for immediate, illustrative classroom use, and 2) for later information. Both types were relevant and useful. 7: Yes, definitely. Preparation and materials were very good. 8: I don't see how the instructor could have been better prepared. He was very well organized! 9: Yes, and my colleagues have asked for copies of all the handouts. 10: The in-structor was very well prepared and went beyond what I was ex-pecting to make the course a full learning experience. Materials distributed will be useful. 11: DS is superb -- a fine teacher and very well prepared. 12: He was very well prepared. 13: Yes. 14: Yes. I cannot imagine a more knowledgeable, tuned-in instructor! It's very helpful to know that my instructor is available via email from now on!

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

1: Yes. DS is an excellent teacher. He is patient, clear, and doesn't mind repeating information, and was never condescending. 2: Defi-nitely. 3: Right on the mark. 4: Yes, though a session on the significance rather than technical issues would have been helpful. 5: Yes -- it covered enoughterritory (with side trips we could explore independently) while assisting those who were struggling with technical problems. 6: Yes. Lots of dumb jokes on Thursday afternoon about memory overloads, but no complaints. 7: Definitely yes. 8: Very much so, a little overwhelming on occasion. 9: Yes. 10: The intellectual level was just right. The instructor had the ability to break difficult concepts into understandable components. 11: Absolutely! 12: Very challenging. 13-14: Yes.

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

5: The visits to the Etext Center were time well spent (just the right amount of time). 7: Yes. 9: The Etext Center illustrated many of the ideas pursued in class. 10: We visited the Electronic Text Center and had a lab on scanning. Very appropriate for this course. 12: Yes. The visit to the Electronic Text Center was most informative and helpful. 13: Yes (trip to Etext Center).

5. Did the actual course content correspond to its RBS brochure description and Expanded Course Description? Did the course in general meet your expectations?

1: Yes. 2: Yes, it was an extremely valuable course. I particularly appreciated all the hands-on experience that the electronic classroom allowed. 3: Yes. Exceeded expectations. 4: Yes, though some course members might have appreciated additional time spent on a particular issue. 5: Yes, it did. 6-7: Yes. 8: The course closely fol-lowed the various class descriptions and met my expectations in every way. 9: Yes, it more than met my expectations. 10: The course did meet my expectations. The section on scanning was an addition to what I thought we would cover. 11: Yes! as always. 12: Yes. More than met them. 13: Yes. 14: Yes. Exceeded expectations. I feel I am already able to do more than I expected to.

6. What did you like best about the course?

1: Actually completing two projects, 1) SGML markup of a document now on the Etext Center WWW server; 2) HTML web home page. 2: The instructor and my fellow students. The attention that RBS paid to our comfort over such an intensive week. 3: Information that was extremely complicated was presented in a very understandable form. The instructor did an excellent job of not letting anyone get lost. 4: DS's ability to project the course's content. Use of material/equipment to create an actual product. DS. 5: Hands-on experience creating SGML and HTML documents using Netscape for Web exploration and document creation and learning resources to consult. The instructor was enthusiastic, helpful, and very well qualified to teach us how to learn. 6: Hands-on experience, with each member of the class using different materials -- result: discussion of fuller range of potential problems, solutions, &c. 7: 1) The instructor -- knowledge, presentation (organized sensibly, clear in presentations and explanations), personality. 2) Hands-on work and, especially, that we each created a ``real'' electronic text. 3) Through creation of our own home pages, we each also had something ``real'' to take with us. 8: 1) The instructor. DS is an extraordinarily competent, lucid, and generous individual who communicated a great deal of information in a very short time! 2) My fellow students. RBS students always are a fun and interesting group! 9: DS is a brilliant teacher, very patient and interested in everything. 10: The clarity of the explanations. Hands-on experience with the encoding of a manuscript and the creation of a home page. Good mix of theory and practical application. Instructor is very knowledgeable and delightful. 11: The hands-on markup of text was what I wanted and got. 12: There was lots of hands-on time. 13: The instructor presented concepts clearly and was very patient with questions and problems during hands-on portions of class. The hands-on exercises were invaluable. I learned lots. 14: Hands-on creation of our own Web page, with marking up and transcribing a document, got us to use everythingthat came whizzing by in the lectures.

7. How could the course have been improved?

1: 1) Provide a follow-up course in the future for those who have taken this course. 2) Offer a second week option! 2: I would like to have seen it longer. I also wonder, as heretical as this might seem, if one of the speakers in the week of Introduction to Elec-tronic Texts could not be relevant to both the course and rare books. Susan Hockey, Sperberg-McQueen, Lou Bernard? 3: I don't see how. 4: Probably by (somehow) tracking the students into abil-ity groups. 5: Perhaps next year, when the Berkeley Finding Aid project is more settled, more time could be spent discussing these issues. We didn't quite get to discussing etext impact on special collections, as was suggested in the course outline. 6: Cooler room (on Thursday, especially). 7: At this point (3:45 pm Friday), I'm overwhelmed. That is, I'm not able to suggest improvements because I've barely comprehended the material. My thought at this moment is that it can't really be improved -- except, of course, that DS will continue to modify it as he sees appropriate. Students would find it helpful to have more experience than I had had with DOS and Windows. 8: Emphasize the need for Windows familiarity for those taking the course. This may seem like a given nowadays, but the fact remains that a small and declining minority of us have little knowledge of Windows, which can cause a great deal of bo-ther for students and instructor. DS, of course, was extraordinarily accommodating! 9: Could it be smaller if it were offered twice? DS wanted to give a lot of individual help, but was very pressed for time. 10: A smaller class would be even more appealing. Mention bringing pictures to scan. 11: More time/another week -- so much to know, so little time. 12: More time for discussion of general issues like standards for archival finding aids. 14: Get the reading list out a little earlier. Get Daniel Pitti or another SGML author in one day for some counterpoint. Cheat sheet of commands for navigating DOS, FTP that editors use.


8. Any final thoughts?

1: Definitely a worthwhile course. Difficult material is presented clearly and the hands-on application is invaluable. 2: It was a user-friendly way to learn about electronic texts. 3: This was a wonderful experience in every possible way. The opportunity of interacting with people in other disciplines was delightful and informative. This is one of the most important things I've done in a long time. Thank you. 4: Though the staff, courtesies, and refreshments were satisfactory to excellent, I found the breaks in the Press Room crowded, noisy, and irritating. Would it be possible for a set of breaks to be held at another location. On the Lawn, at least once, might have been good. 5: Go for it! 6: Come rested and willing to go from the first day (Friday comes too soon). 8: 1) Keep DS at UVa for the rest of his life and give him big raises each year! 2) Sign a contract with JP to insure his presence on the RBS faculty for the next 20 years at least! 9: I'll be back next year! It was nearly overwhelmingly in-formative. 10: It would be helpful to be familiar with DOS commands and FTP. 14: I came in feeling etext and Web illiterate. I leave the course feeling ready to take on the world -- and making sense of what all the hubbub is about on the list serves. I doubt there is a better, more personable, more skillful instructor for this course than DS!

Number of respondents: 14

Percentages