|
|
No. 26: Introduction to Electronic Texts and Images (I) 21-25 July 1997 |
|
1. How useful were the pre-course readings?
1: On reflection, quite useful. Although they seemed impenetrable at the time, they really provided quite a solid foundation that helped me stay with the flow of the course quite easily. 2: I spent several hours on pre-course readings. They were quite essential to my felling prepared for class. 3: Yes the pre-course readings were helpful. I did not understand many things, walking into RBS but at lest the vocabulary and principles sounded familiar to me when DS explained them. 4: I wish I'd known the list was more a reference list than a reading list. When I looked at the items on the web in the weeks before this week, I found myself dreading the prospect of taking it. After I got here and the course started, of course, I felt completely different. 5: Useful as reference, but not to curl up with and read. 6: Useful, and not too overwhelming. 7: None given out. 8: More emphasis on TEI; make clear that little time will be spent on HTML. 9: Pre-course readings were too technical to read in a sustained fashion, but they were useful for familiarizing me with terms, references, and definitions used in the course. 10: Difficult reading without necessary background these were the SGML technical documents. 11: Frightening and did not seem essential. 12: Not much. One can't coherently read SGML tagging without a particular context. 13: Useful, but baffling because of the level of detail. (Really, who can read technical documentation cover-to-cover?) |
|
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, although access to the wealth of material online at UVa's website is the real trove of treasure in this area. 2: Yes. 3: Yes ds stuck to the syllabus pretty closely. 4: They were both appropriate and useful. I think they'll be a good guide to further information as I realize I need it when I get home. 5: Yes, very. 6: Extremely good handouts. 7: Yes. DS was so generous with providing us job descriptions for all jobs in the Etext Center. This will save me days of work! 8: Yes. 9: Yes, distributed materials will be useful back home. 10: Yes. 11: yes, very helpful; everyone at my institution will want copies. 12: Mostly; material distributed was useful, but there was not enough of it. I wished we had had some written outline or guidelines for case studies of setting up an etext center. 13: Yes, and yes. Lists of hardware and software, and things like staff job descriptions, would also be welcome. |
|
3. Was the intellectual level of the course content appropriate?
1: Absolutely. 2: I'm afraid not. I was disappointed with the very little hands-on practical experience with scanners. I was shocked to scan only the cover of the Photoshop manual and to have a half-day spent on HTML 101. I was disappointed to spend half a day watching the instructor parse student files. I was very disappointed not to be involved at all in the scanning of the letter I prepared in SGML. The course 26 experience was too vicarious. 3: Yes. 4: Just right for me and, it seemed, for the other members of the class. 5: Yes. Despite different levels of computer expertise in the class, the instructor pitched the content at what seemed like a good level for everybody. 6: Just right for me maybe the pace was a bit slow the first few days, but overall, high quality content I couldn't get anywhere else. 7: Yes. DS is a scholar himself, so he is not only technically proficient, but also understanding of scholarly notation, textual variations, etc. 8-11: Yes. 12: Content and speed were both appropriate for me; however, I wish that we did not have to spend an entire first day on basic HTML. We should have delved right into SGML. 13: Yes. I did think the morning devoted to HTML should have been unnecessary you can learn HTML everywhere these days, and the course time could be better used elsewhere. |
|
4. If your course had field trips, were they effective?
1: Yes, a trip to the Electronic Text Center for hands-on imaging experience was invaluable. 2: N.A. 3: Yes I came to RBS in part to get some hands-on experience with scanning and format conversion and the lab experience proved to be a useful introduction to the technology. 4: We went to the Etext Center for scanning, which was interesting and useful. 5: The excursion to the Etext Center for scanning was very useful. 6: Our trip to the scanning lab was a good exercise. 7: Yes, we went to the scanning room. I wish we could have spent MORE time there, trying different methods with overhead camera setups, etc. I recommend that in the future we cut down the amount of time we did mark-up in class, or editing the last day, so this scanner/camera segment can be expanded. 8-9: N/A. 10: Yes. 11: Very well. 12: The field trip to the etext center could have been more effective had we actually digitized images relevant to the project at hand, as opposed to irrelevant book covers. 13: N/A. |
|
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?
2: I expected something much more demanding in terms of technical output by class members. I was also sorry not to hear anything about the involvement of librarians in etext activities at UVa, as well as issues of project management. Who are the complete array of individuals involved here? 3: Yes although the area of electronic text editing and imaging is so vast that I come away with a sense of newer developments, software, possibilities thought I know I could not exactly start an electronic text center, I have gotten a better picture of what I need to learn in the future. 4: The course was what I needed, even though I wasn't completely clear before arriving either what I expected or needed. 5: The course exceeded my expectations. It provided an overview and context as well as invaluable hands-on experience. The fact that the exercise we did was a real-life project with a permanent result was icing on the cake. 6: YES! 7: Yes. I had heard good things about this course and it definitely met my expectations. He covered workflow, grants, new software developments, etc. 8: Yes. 9: Yes, the course met expectations. 10: Yes. 11: Perfectly. 12: Yes. I have very favorable impressions of this course, although at time the work flow was not evenly distributed from day to day. I did, however, appreciate the contextualizing of SGML markup on a broader scale. 13: Yes, and yes. |
|
6. What did you like best about the course?
1: The instructor. DS was the very model of what an instructor should be. His enthusiasm for the subject was infectious, and he is gifted in being able to make difficult material clear and comprehensible. He was also humorous and infinitely patient, not to mention a master of all aspects of the subject. 2: DS's dedication and energy. He needs more pedagogical support and staff: too much for one person. 3: DS's intelligent, good-humored, confident, and even-tempered approach. He makes effective presentation look so easy. 4: The clarity, enthusiasm, and helpfulness of DS. And the satisfaction of actually seeing our transcribed and coded letters up on the web. 5: The instructor's vast knowledge and ability to explain clearly and entertainingly. 6: The chance for hands-on experience. The time to ask questions. Instructor's comments on his projects and experience. 7: DS. Such a course could be really boring without a good instructor. The Civil War letters we marked up were an excellent choice. Also, we didn't just do mark-up language; we talked in a broader context about project management, etc. 8: Instructor; wide coverage of topics related to etexts. 9: I liked transcribing an original Civil War letter. 10: Hands-on application. 11: How it gathered up all different experience levels and advanced everyone's knowledge and confidence. 12: 1) Placing SGML in context. 2) Discussion of relevant technologies to etext collections. 3) Appropriate technical speed. 13: The coverage of the subject was excellent, and the instructor was very willing to share his considerable expertise about practical as well as technical issues. |
|
7. How could the course have been improved?
2: Perhaps more of a case study/problem-solving approach, such as Cornell's digital imaging model. More discussion on cost analysis. More technical demands. More information on organization of digital projects. 3: DS perhaps could have compiled a handout on effective software, their applications, their manufacturers although I know that this picture is always changing. 4: I found Day 4 a bit slow at least it didn't hold my interest as the others did. But I'm not sure what to suggest that would have made that different. 5: Wonderful as it is. 6: Make it two weeks long. 7: I would expand the coverage of EAD (finding aids), and give us more time with cameras and scanners some creative ways to get us out of the electronic classroom once in a while. 8: Even at the risk of not individually reviewing each person's work, it might be better to parse only representative files; error finding and correcting is deadly tedious after you get the idea. Extra time could be used to expand scanning information/practice. 9: The parsing morning session was nearly headache inducing, but I don't know whether this could be avoided. 10: Recommend at least some HTML and/or cataloging experience. 11: A little less parsing. 12: Imaging work must relate to the project. We should have digitized the letters. 13: A little less transcription, and a little more time on constructing the TEI header and the EAD. I'm not sure I got a good grip on how to do these things without the etext center's special forms and filters. |
|
8. 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 and videos,
evening lectures, Bookseller Night, tour of the Alderman digital/electronic centers, printing demonstrations, &c.
1: Pleasantly low key. Always enjoyable. All translate very well to the Charlottesville environment. 2: I'm afraid I partook very little in these because I was helping a colleague with her housing problems. 3: The lectures were delightful and the receptions were wonderfully sociable and civilized. RBS is like graduate school only with truly enjoyable parties! 4: The lectures were fun and interesting. Wish I'd had more time in the local bookshops. 6: Great lectures unique and memorable. 7: In some ways the networking with other colleagues is the most valuable part of RBS. I truly enjoyed all the events this year. 8: All enjoyable; Rotunda exhibit not highlighted! 9: All extra-course activities were instructive and enjoyable. 10: All quite good. The lecturers took their assignments seriously and delivered highly professional presentations. 11: Did not attend. 13: Everything was pleasant, but eventually exhausting. |
|
9. Any final thoughts? Did you get your money's worth?
1: The prerequisites are important, the reading helps. I definitely got my money's worth. Future courses in other arenas may have difficulty living up to this one! 2: I am pleased to have had this opportunity, but I don't believe I was the right person to take this particular course. 3: I think that RBS is a worthwhile experience for those willing to dedicated five intense business days to the course. Yes, I got my money's worth. 4: I got my money's worth (and think my library will, too). Have your own transportation, if you can. Read the evaluations from previous years. 5: Yes. 6: Transportation from the airport is expensive for one person. I never saw an AAA cab mine charged $26. 7: As I said above, this course could really be tedious if taught by the wrong person. So make sure DS teaches it! Yes, I definitely got my money's worth. 8: Yes! 9: It is good to take this course with an idea of a potential project or practical application back home. 10: The instructor was stunning. 11: The course was very good, although in any technology class, one has to be very critical of software and be aware that solutions which have worked at UVa are not necessarily global solutions. I definitely got my money's worth and would recommend the course to anyone starting to think about scanning/ SGML.12: I think so. 13: Yes, absolutely. I was very impressed with the hard work and good cheer of the RBS staff (who are probably glad to see us all go home at the end of the week). |
| Number of respondents: 13 |
|
| There were 13 students: five general librarians with no rare book duties (38%), three rare book librarians (23%), two archivist/manuscript librarians (15%), and one each a general librarian with some rare book duties, a rare book/manuscript librarian, and a student/part-time employee (8% each). |