|
|
No. 44: Introduction to Descriptive Bibliography. 4 August - 8 August 1997 Bibliographical Counselor at Large: James Davis Lab Instructors Julia Dupuis Blakely Peter-john Byrnes E. Dever Powell Henry Raine A. Timothy Rogers Samuel C. Wheeler Curator of the Course Museums John Buchtel Hand-Press Printer in Residence Brett Charbeneau |
|
1. How useful were the pre-course readings? How successful was the advance use of the videotape, The Anatomy of a Book, as a teaching tool?
1: For someone new to this field, or indeed to someone coming back for a review, the course would have been a real grind without the pre-course readings and video/workbook. 2: I am glad I had done the pre-course reading. I had to do some re-reading once here, but it definitely helped to read and view in advance. 3: Readings were extremely useful, even though I didn't have a chance to see the Stoddard, my institution's copy being checked out. Perhaps TB's article and Gaskell should be suggested as the first to read for those who don't know. The videotape was a good introduction, though I got the tape early and the supporting items five days later. 4: Pre-course readings were essential for me - but I was glad the reading list implied that some of this was heavy reading and just to plow through it. It was somewhat helpful - but the roll of papers was not necessary. One or two sheets would have done nicely. 5: Bowers was a bit difficult to move through and made sense only after working with the books. 6: The readings were very useful, although Bowers is a bit hard to get through. The videotape was also useful, since seeing something done (or doing it myself) always makes it easier for me to understand than just reading about it. 7: The video was very good reinforcement of the introductory reading, but showing it again during the week seemed redundant. All books in the pre-course list were good background. Bowers was just baffling - until you got a book in hand. 8: Pre-course readings were critical to an understanding of the course; the more you had worked with Gaskell and, especially, Bowers, the better. The video was very good, particularly on 12mo, and the folding exercises helped. 9: Pre-course readings were useful, videotape very good. 10: Pre-course readings were very helpful, but there needs to be a Fredson Bowers handbook/summary/translation, especially for the beginner. The Museum cleared a lot of confusion on many Bowers issues. 11: Pre-course reading were absolutely essential. Advance use of the videotape was not necessary because it was available during lunch breaks. 12: Couldn't have survived without reading in advance - should have read more Bowers and Gaskell and referred to Carter. 13: The readings, especially Bowers, were essential. You might inform people of the availability of 3-D Carter, because reading many of the descriptions/definitions of terms would have been more rewarding if I had known that I would soon have the chance of meeting, and thus understanding, the items being defined. 14: Readings were critically important and showed an attempt to bring the students to Bowers as kindly as possible. Video as a learning tool was excellent. I regret that the collation video was not ready. Still, no reading can really prepare one for this. 15: Pre-course readings are absolutely essential. Much of the material is learned outside of class though the labs, but it is only when one tries to practice descriptive bibliography under the supervision of an expert that the skill actually materializes: a physician cannot learn medicine without a corpse. Bowers and Anatomy of a book are first principles, Gaskell and Carter second. 16: Pre-course readings were essential for the course. The tape was most helpful in providing the physical demonstration of techniques only read about. 17: Readings were very helpful. However, Bowers is impossible to plow through without an instructor and examples. The workbook and papers were fine without the video - you can't watch and fold at the same time. 18: Mandatory reading and viewing. 19: The pre-course readings were difficult (Bowers), but necessary. This became clear shortly after class began. The videotape was extremely useful. 20: The videotape was critical to view before reading. Carter was OK, Gaskell very useful as pre-course. I appreciate and understand Belanger better now than before the course. Most of Bowers was not useful for a beginner without the course. 21: Pre-course readings were excellent, but I would strongly encourage not reading all of Bowers as I did. I struggled through all of it and did not feel much wiser when I finished. I will get much more out of reading it after the course, but will be the first person standing in line to purchase RN's revision! The Anatomy of a book video is wonderful. I only wish that I had enough money to buy a copy for my institution. 22: The videotape was good. For those of us reading Bowers for the first time, it was confusing. It's certainly not a practical guide or handbook to figure out. 23: All were helpful, video included. Readings helped me get up to speed for the first classes. 24: Useful, but quite pricey - I think it would have been as useful to show it at the beginning of the class. The assigned readings helped. 25: The readings were essential. The film was very helpful. 26: Very useful, but the warning terrified me ("if you can't read it, withdraw now"). Don't change the warning. Perhaps suggest first reading Gaskell pp.1-185 (hand press), THEN Bowers. This helped immeasurably. Thanks for RS - a pure joy. 27: Readings are unquestionably valuable - especially, of course, Bowers. The video is excellent - although for those of us who live without VCRs, not as convenient as for those who have them. 28: Very useful indeed. I was quite surprised that we were immediately set out to the world of Bowers with no hand holding. 29: All the texts were useful. Bowers was essential. The video, Anatomy of a book, was very good for those unfamiliar with format. 30: The course would have been impossible without the readings and the tape, although I would make one correction (addition) to the tape. 31: The pre-course readings were somewhat helpful, but mostly confusing. Once again, a totally new subject. The video was excellent - clear and concise, and very informative. 32: Very useful. Gaskell and Carter made it almost fun. Bowers less so. The video, too, was useful, although I received the workbook and tube of sheets two days later, which made using them together somewhat hurried. Mail the video in the tube? 33: The pre-course readings were useful, though a little intense (mostly Bowers, of course). Anatomy of a book, which I saw after reading Gaskell, Bowers, and TB's article, was enjoyable, but by the time I saw it, my understanding of format was already quite clear. 34: The videotape was fantastic. Great idea. Successful tool. I can imagine the expense to make it, but it was well worth it from the viewpoint of a person who benefited. Could the concept be expanded to other courses? 35: Very useful, although formidable. With my busy schedule as a single parent, I rarely found sufficient time at one time to study the books thoroughly. The video was magical, but only after making at least one attempt to get through Bowers's Chapter 5. |
|
2. Were the course syllabus, Trost-Büchel lab workbook, exit reading list, and other materials distributed in class useful (or will they be so in the future, after you return home)?
1: Yes, both now and later. 2: The course syllabus and reading list will be very useful in the future. I need to re-read the Trost-Büchel lab workbook. 3: The lab book needs some clarifying - it was easier to understand p.5 than the diagrams with heavy text. Perhaps the p.5 directions should go first (with the diagrams), followed by the more detailed explanations (it was a little Bowers-ish). I shall cherish the exit list and start on it next week. 4: Yes, especially the reading list. 5: I think that the exit reading list will be very useful in preparing for courses at RBS in the future and will be useful to me in professional development. 6: Yes. Having the list and syllabus will be especially useful later, when I'm back at work with no resident experts to answer my questions. 7: The syllabus index to Bowers is invaluable. Folding the sheets seemed a bit redundant, but fun to do again. The exit reading list is great, but you should note which ones are required for RBS courses. 8: Trost-Büchel was similar to Anatomy of a book materials, but the reinforcement didn't hurt. 9: Very nicely done. 10: Yes. 11: All were (or will be) useful. 12: Hopefully, I expect so. 13: The Trost-Büchel lab exercise seemed redundant after having had the opportunity to fold the sheets that accompanied the very useful video. 14: Trost-Büchel lab book - I was confounded by the instructions prior to p.5. Other materials were good. Thank you for the exit list, a gift to us. 15: The exit reading list is most useful - the more so for the critical annotations, more of which would be welcome. The Gathering Counter for Collation is a great gift. The Trost-Büchel lab workbook was useful, but the first lab should be more directed to imposition patterns, formats, and indications of conjugacy to prepare students for the coming collation work. 16: Yes. I will be sharing these materials with colleagues in my library. 17: All were helpful. I look forward to going over these materials at home. I'm most anxious to examine the exit reading list carefully and start some serious reading in unexplored areas. 18: Yes, and I hope so. 19: These items will be useful after I return home. 20: Extremely useful. Will use them for myself and my teaching. 21: Yes, although I believe that the exit reading list will probably take me a lifetime to finish! 22: All materials distributed will be helpful in the future. 23: Yes. 24: Yes, very! Considering my advanced age, it will probably be a lifetime reading list, though. 25: Everything except Trost-Büchel was or will be useful. The shortcoming of Trost-Büchel was that it did not expand on the video. Adding exercises would increase its value. 26: Yes. 27: Everything worked for me. 28: Exit reading list is fabulous . Bowers index, too (you need to finish the whole book and sell them for $3 each to make money for BAP). 29: The Trost-Büchel workbook is a very fine addition to the Lab. It gives the student an opportunity for hands-on assembly of a small book. There is no better teaching method than by providing an opportunity to actually fold and cut sheets. The exit list is very valuable. I already have my copy marked to show the texts that I have and the ones I need to get copies of. The handouts (index to Chapter 5 of Bowers, &c.) were real time savers. 31: Yes. The syllabus with Bowers's index was a lifesaver. The beginning of the revision, perhaps? Exit reading list will be a great resource on a variety of subjects, with one leading to another. 32: Absolutely. 33: This material was most useful, especially the exit reading list. The Lab workbook could perhaps be reused rather than given out because its use (for me) was to guide me through the exercise; I don't think I'll consult it in the future. 34: The syllabus was excellent, the workbooks perfect. Excellent ideas and tools for demonstration and practice. I still struggle with conceptualization of 12mo and 16mo and need to study for clarity - don't want not to solve the puzzle. All materials were perfect. I love the deckle edge of format examples. The exit reading list is a gift to me. Thank you. 35: Very much so. I have already starred at least a couple books from the exit reading list to find when I return home. |
|
3. Was the intellectual level of the course content appropriate?
1: Definitely appropriate for the intended audience. 2: Yes. 3: For me it was ideal. 4-7: Yes. 8: The intellectual level was just right - you were kept interested and stimulated, but not overwhelmed. 9-11: Yes. 12: Yes - I would have liked some enlightenment in lab about German, Dutch, &c., books in terms of "routine" characteristics that crop up! 13-14: Yes. 15: Indeed. One never felt spoken down to in dealing with such complicated matters. 16: Yes. It is quite invigorating to be treated as if you have some experience/knowledge. 17: I don't understand the question. 18: Yes. 19: Yes, very appropriate. 20: Yes. Thought-provoking lectures. Helpful on technical level for new material (for me) like printing. Lab work was very challenging, but not impossible. I appreciated regular references to many intellectual applications of the course content. 21: Yes. 22: On the application for admittance, the following questions should have been asked: a) prior experience; b) currently engaged in collation; c) no prior knowledge at all. 23: Yes. 24: Lectures really did not add to the readings. I expected a bit more delving into Bowers and others from a theoretical level (e.g., symbols used, when and why, &c.). 25-26: Yes. 27: Exhileratingly so. 28: Very difficult, but better to have too much challenge. Better to be Rare Book Boot Camp than Rare Book Camp. 29-30: Yes. 31: Yes, it always provided a challenge. 32: Yes, given the general introductory nature of the course, there was always someone to answer more in-depth questions I had. 33: Yes. 34: I approached the classroom with some anxiety. Little by little, I conquered - only because of the thought, creativity, and talent that went into the development. 35: Yes, as the class had a very broad range of people - from complete novice to curators of special and rare collections, I think a good middle ground was attained; certainly it was stimulating for me. |
|
4. How effectively were the various parts of this course organized and co-ordinated?
1: Incredibly well-organized. 2: The course was organized well. The lab assistance I received was excellent. I liked breaking into a three-member group. We got some individual attention. 3: I was impressed by this aspect. Everything flowed smoothly. 4: Very well organized. Getting the class size down to three for the labs was beneficial. The Museums, which must have taken a lot of organization and moving stuff all over, were great and, for a visual learner like me, illuminated much of what I'd read. 5: It seemed that everything moved smoothly, even the change in locations. 6: I think that the structure of the course was very effective. The alternation between lectures and hands-on experience was very good. It sort of broke up the day, but kept the momentum going. Everything was very well organized. 7: Amazingly well. The amount of work the behind-the-scenes people do was incredible. The lab instructor, and breakdown into groups of three, was a great idea. 8: You've got it down pat; don't fool with it! 9: The staff worked hard to keep things going smoothly - it showed. 10: There's some free time Friday morning, while students are waiting for interviews, that could be better filled. Otherwise, cohorts were cozy and convenient. 11: Under the circumstances (changes in classrooms, &c.), organization and coordination were excellent. 12: The game plan was clear, the pieces fit together, the time slots and breaks were user-friendly. Well done! 13: Considering the complexity of all that was going on, incredibly well. You adapted seamlessly to the closing of Peabody. 14: Extremely well coordinated and organized. 15: An astounding array of teaching resources were deployed with great skill for the students' benefit. 16: The breaking the class into two legions and the further breaking into three-person cohorts was appropriate and necessary for the efficient presentation of course material. 17: This was one of the more organized and smooth-running seminars I have ever attended. Having been on the other side of the desk, I can appreciate what's involved in organizing this week. 18: I was in Blue Legion; Orange seemed to have a better schedule. Having much of Monday free seemed a waste. Having homework and Lab back-to-back meant starting homework the night before with no one around to provide any assistance. I cut out of Museum early to work on the next day's homework. Orange had TAs available during homework, while during Blue homework, the TAs were doing Orange Labs. But life is not fair. 19: I was very impressed with the organization of such a large group and believe that it worked well. 20: Organization was very effective. Don't change it. 21: To me, this course appeared to be a well choreographed ballet - I was at first concerned when I learned there were 36 students in it, but it was handled exceedingly well. Applause to the workers who moved everything around for us! 22: Good organization and coordination, but those who responded "no prior knowledge at all" should have been given some initial guidance and instruction by the Lab instructors before having to go off on their own to self-learn how to do the homework. 23: I liked the homework one day, Lab the next. I would not have liked the Blue Legion's same-day approach. 24: Considering the size of the class, everything was well-organized and coordinated - all went smoothly. 25: Well-organized and coordinated. 26: Very effectively. 27: The schedule, initially requiring the kind of concentration necessary for figuring out an 18mo, proved effective for me. While content was overwhelming, the temporal compartments were still breathless fun and challenge. 28: Excellently. Museums were incredible. 29: Very effectively coordinated - from a student's viewpoint. 30: Very well done as far as I was concerned. (I was in the Orange Legion.) I noted that our parts seemed to fit together better than the Blue Legion's. 31: The Labs, I feel, left a little to be desired. There should have been some organization in the presentation of the information. To me, all the parts fit together, as in a puzzle. 32: Extremely. The difficult logistics made this even more impressive. 33: I liked the alternating schedule. The variety of approaches kept things interesting. 34: Perfectly organized and coordinated. I was a course developer for many years. I am in awe of your success. 35: For the brevity (really) of each part presented within a week's time (although it seemed so much longer!), I felt it was quite cohesive. |
|
5. To what extent did the Museums (and the BAP Classroom reference library and 3-D Carter) contribute to the success of the course? How could the Museums have been improved?
1: Excellent selection of relevant material, conveniently displayed and so enjoyably hands-on. 2: The Museum sessions were wonderful. Of course there wasn't enough time. Probably should have had better tools for putting our leaves and gatherings together on Monday. 3: The Museums and using the press clarified processes and materials for me in a way that description can not. 4: See above. I could have used more time - especially at the type and binding one. There just wasn't enough time to be as thorough as I would have liked. 5: I thought the Museums were absolutely essential to the course. I also found the BAP reference library and 3-D Carter very informative. I only wish that I had more time to spend in Museum and the reference library. 6: I think that this was essential to the success of the course. Being able to pick up and examine examples of the books and technology used to create them makes it much easier to visualize what happens in the process of creating a book. 7: It seemed perfect to me. We'll be making a 3-D Carter, back at work: a great idea. Can we check out your reference library during the week? 8: Museums could be improved by having them open longer (evenings?) and putting materials into an order that proceeds from A to B to C. Could you stagger entrance times so that students could follow a sequence? The material was superb. 9: Museums were a favorite. 10: The Museums were excellent demonstrations of Bowers in action and application. 11: Materials in Museums helped me visualize certain objects and processes discussed in class. I suggest illustrating the difference between cased and bound books in the Binding Museum. 12: Excellent reinforcement - perhaps some commentary here and there from the staff member present. The Printing and Binding and Paper Museums were extremely exciting. 13: The Museums were essential to understanding the material covered in the lectures. The breadth of materials displayed was simply incredible - in fact, often simply too much was presented to absorb. I could have spent more time in each Museum. Not enough time (due to homework) was available really to use the reference collection and 3-D Carter. They were also located where a class took place - I would have spent the remainder of Friday morning there, but for the class. 14: I looked at the reference library and 3-D Carter only briefly. Museum - I would have preferred more time to work on collation (with instructors circulating as needed). Museum made the day pleasant - it was not dull - but we are in a time crunch and need the hours to think through problems with the books. 15: The Museums are highly effective teaching tools and expose students to a wide range of aspect of book production and bibliography. The first Museum should be used to prepared students for collation work. 16: The Museums, Labs, lectures, and homework segments of the course enabled one to learn in more active ways than by passive lecture. The manipulation of materials in Museum and the opportunity to work at one's own pace is unique. 17: Museums were great: marvelous opportunity for hands-on experience. 18: They were fun, but spending time with the books was more important. 19: The Museums helped elaborate on the lectures and were very useful. 20: Museums were very helpful. Contact with physical parts of the book and related artifacts were invaluable. 21: The Museums provide a wonderful supplement to the lectures. 22: Museums and lectures were great. 23: Useful, and helped explain small points better than Carter. Touchy-feely is better for me. 24: Very informative and a great touch and see experience. 25: They were very important to my understanding of the physical creation of the book. I would only recommend as a handout an illustrated catalog that one could take back as a reference work. 26: Very important for the full picture. If they could only have been half an hour longer, I could have seen everything (or available after dinner - could an overnight space be secured so the change could occur in the morning, giving us the hours after dinner?). 27: For me, the Museums were a rich, hands-on opportunity. The only problem was always running out of time. 28: Museums and 3-D Carter were some of my favorite parts. To actually see Monotype and Linotype finally made sense. I've read over and over all the pieces of the process, but it never made sense. Binding types (i.e., calf, vellum, sheep trying to be goat) was also very useful. 29: The Museums are priceless. To be able to handle the parts of a paper mold, a Baskerville with cancels, boxes of different leather book covers, book binding and decorating tools, &c., gives students a much better overall understanding than just pictures and text descriptions. 30: Some Museum sections could have been shorter, but that is probably a function of how much one knows of the subject before one starts RBS. Some were super. 31: The Museums were excellent. To have hands-on privileges is wonderful and helps to bring the various aspects of the book to life. I saw examples that I will not have a chance to see again. 32: I found the Paper Museum less exciting than the others, but that is almost certainly a product of my own interests. 3-D Carter was wonderfully useful. 33: I didn't use the reference library or 3-D Carter. The Museums were good, hands-on teaching tools. The Museum could possibly be improved by less reliance on the written descriptions and more interaction with the instructors. 34: Superb. Scope perfect. Selection perfect. I don't think I will ever see such perfect companion aids to a course in my lifetime (Museums and 3-D Carter). 35: I thought that they contributed highly to the success, balanced between hands-on demos and open-ended explorations. Sometimes I feel I could have used MORE time (especially in the exploration Museums). |
|
6. 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?
Julia Blakely's labs: 1: The combination of homework and labs was the meat and potatoes of the course - it wouldn't have worked without these components having been successful. 2: My lab instructor was great. We got individual attention. We were lucky to have a room with a large blackboard. I liked putting up our attempts and jointly going over our mistakes. Julia Blakely did an excellent job. 3: I enjoyed our labs; we could compare thought processes and not be too humiliated by dumb mistakes. We also had time to go over parts of the next homework assignment that we were uncertain about. I'm a little uneasy about our separation into like-thinking groups. On one hand, I can see the benefits, but on the other, it also takes away from the profession-mixing that is so stimulating here. 4: I thought the method of teaching collation and format was very effective - i.e., do it first, then discuss. The problems encountered were unusual and difficult, and working through them was a good way to learn patience, diligence, &c. 5: The labs were successful, although I had some difficulty completing all of the assignments. I worked on them well beyond the homework sessions (as scheduled), but still felt that there were too many books to work through. (This may be a personal weakness.) 6: The labs were quite successful. JB is very good at explaining why the formula is what it is, and where you went wrong, without making you feel like an idiot. Peter-john Byrnes's labs 7: Great labs. Peter-john Byrnes was a great communicator with a firm grasp of Bowers. 8: Labs were the most stimulating educational experience I've had in years; PB knows just how to get the most from his students. 9: Labs were good; PB was knowledgeable and pleasant, but clearly more interested in the 19th century than in what we were (mostly) working on. 10: More time. I spent four hours, on average, doing homework each night; other students stayed longer. Desbib students are willing to work long hours, but some further accommodation of time should be allowed, rather than 1.5 hours. 11: Labs were one of the highlights of this course. Keep the lab groups small! PB was very helpful and effective in labs. 12: Perhaps, supplying an example or two from which to proceed, a guideline/reference other than checking Bowers. Richard Noble's lab: 13: Labs were terrific (and even here, often times more information was provided than simply could be assimilated - e.g., it is hard to remember and understand that a certain characteristic didn't appear in a particular national printing repertoire until a particular year while your mind is still trying to understand the implications and actual manifestation of the characteristic itself). 14: Very good labs. RN was very diplomatic, always, not an unimportant trait! He was very knowledgeable - a tendency to offer too much over and above the issue, but always easy to bring back. 15: Format and collation labs are the core of the course; they are a wholly successful and essential means of teaching descriptive bibliography. RN was very effective in explaining how format and collation formulas ought to be expressed. He was extremely patient and receptive in entertaining alternative collational formulas - the best way to support the learning process. Labs could be best improved by adding one more session. Groups of three people are ideal. Dever Powell's labs: 16: Format and collation lab instructor was very successful in guiding us in our efforts to master the grammar and syntax of descriptive notation. Maybe, in the future, we could have an easier way to share our results with each other, maybe preparing our assignments for an overhead projector? 17: Dever Powell was a patient and caring instructor. He is very knowledgeable and an important asset to RBS. Hope he will be here for future Desbib students. It would be helpful to be given the answers to one example each night. That way, the student could work backwards on one book. I sometimes felt quite lost and could have used that guidance. 18: Not enough time, of course. My TA was quite good, but I have no idea if other TAs were much better or worse. I did learn a lot from the Labs by simply seeing the proper grammar for things I got right and seeing the proper approach for things I got wrong. 19: The labs were perfect. My lab instructor went above and beyond the call of duty to help us understand better. 20: Lab was very useful, the heart of the Desbib course. DP was very clear, helpful, patient, with a good sense of humor. As a beginner, six books took me until Library closing each night (with time out for dinner and lecture), plus an hour or two with Bowers in my room. I would have liked time to go back to the books after Lab. Thoroughly enjoyed the challenge, but needed more time. Henry Raine's labs: 21: I had zero experience in format and collation, so, as another member of the Blue Legion phrased it, they were a "humbling experience." I learned a lot, but still need practice and will have to find time to do this. In our group, the lab instructor guarded the answers as if they were a secret, when all I wanted to do was write down the correct answer to refer to when I get back to work. A copy of the correct answer after performing the exercise would be extremely helpful. 22: Somewhat successful. Didn't feel like I was taught at all in the labs. During homework for the Orange Legion, there was one lab instructor who basically just told us to be quiet and work independently. Labs only went over our mistakes and told us what we should have found. It was hard to know that beforehand, since we were given no guidance other than the preliminary readings. 23: Great. Henry Raine was very helpful and good at answering questions (or getting the answers for us). 24: Very helpful - cohort was small enough to get that almost one-on-one experience. HR is very knowledgeable and could explain well. Exception: the experimental group work with the Trost-Büchel did not work well. The hammering and commotion caused by people trying to sew up the thing interfered with the basic purpose of the exercise. 25: I found the organization of these labs effective and would only suggest that the lab instructor be given more time to go over the homework and maybe present us with more examples, not to collate, but to illustrate. 26: Great work by the lab instructor. His was a herculanean task at times (like teaching someone over the telephone how to ride a bike). He kept an eye on the clock, knew what points to discuss, which to research in Bowers, and when to say, "It's best to move on." Timothy Rogers's lab: 27: They got me started, but a lot more experience is in order for it truly to cohere. Tim Rogers was excellent - careful, patient, clear, encouraging. Only more time and fluorescent light-swords would have helped me more (and a better index to all of Bowers). 28: I personally was not successful if you add up rights and wrongs, but we don't. I got through less than half the assigned books, but that made me spend more time overall, I think (nights in the Library, that is). TR was an excellent instructor, forgiving, knowledgeable, and explained interpretations well. 29: TR was a wonderful Lab instructor. He was able to explain the RBS answers to collation problems easily and with authority. He was very diplomatic in explaining student errors. I felt these Labs were the heart of the course and for me were very successful. Samuel Wheeler's labs: 30: I thought these labs were just OK, and that I might not have gotten anything out of them if I hadn't had great lab partners who added a lot to each session. 31: Not successful. I felt the instructor was disorganized and that perhaps he, himself, wasn't too sure of the facts. The lab maybe could follow a definite format. 32: This was probably the most disappointing part of the course. Sam Wheeler was, unfortunately, disorganized and not especially alert on Tuesday, and we practically had to order him to divulge the formulas. He was not keeping these from us for pedagogical reasons: he didn't have some of them and he didn't get to those he did because he wanted to talk about other things. I wish I'd been in another cohort. Luckily, I have enough experience that I was able to get something out of the Labs, but I think a complete neophyte would have been lost. 33: My instructor was a little rusty at first, but improved throughout the week. This wasn't really a problem; the Labs were still very useful. But I couldn't help thinking that the students in RN's Lab, for example, were receiving better instruction. I don't know how you could solve this, though. Cloning? 34: Labs were great. I appreciated the instructor's use of a blackboard. Illustrations of gatherings was very useful. I appreciated the tip on comparing type. 35: They were satisfactory. As a highly self-motivated person, myself, it didn't really matter if I didn't get absolute answers to questions I had, so it was sufficient for my purposes. My Lab instructor seemed a bit shaky in his grasp/conveyance of the material, but not because of lack of understanding or explaining - it was just his personal style (which fit me well). |
|
7. Did the actual course content correspond to its RBS brochure description and Expanded Course Description?
1: Yes. 2: Yes, it met my expectations. 3-4: Yes. 5: We spent more time on format and collation than I thought we would, but I don't think that detracted from the course. 6: Yes. 7: Yes, and beyond. 8: Yes, on both counts. We might have spent more time on edition, issue, and state. 9: Yes, far exceeded. 10: Surpassed expectations. Good training and broad exposure. 11: General correspondence between the brochure description and actual course content. The course did not meet my expectations: I expected it to be tedious and boring. 12: Yes! what more can I say. 13: Yes. 14: Yes. Yes. 16-17: Yes. 18: Yes and yes. Actually (from reading previous years' evaluations) I expected the course to be more overwhelming. I thought it was manageable. 19: Yes! This course met and exceeded my expectations. 20: Yes. 21: Yes, the content corresponded to the course description. The course exceeded my expectations - I can now at least read collation statements, even though I would still ask for help in defining them when writing my own. 22: The course content should state that you are expected to have a basic knowledge of how to do collation. 23-25: Yes. 26: I had high expectations, and they were exceeded (same was true of The English patient). My only gripe is that alumni had painted such a grueling picture for me that I had the shakes the first two days and most of the preceding week. Don't know how that could be changed. I'll have a different, less dour story for prospective students (e.g., "Be prepared. You'll love it. Show up on time. You'll love it. Do the reading. You'll love it. &c."). 27: Yes. 28: Yes, and far more, for certain. I had no idea I could learn so much in a week. 29: Yes. 30: I didn't guess the actual nature of the course from the brochure because I didn't know the definition of descriptive bibliography. Even not knowing that, the course met all expectations, and more. 31: Yes, it did correspond to the brochure and expanded description. It met my expectations and went far beyond. I feel I did not have sufficient knowledge, but I did learn a tremendous amount. 32: Yes, save for the quality of the Lab instructor. 33: Yes. 34: All corresponded, but see my final remark, below. 35: Yes, very much so. |
|
8. What did you like best about the course?
1: Homework - the time to spend on books. 2: The class was fun. I liked do the homework exercises; certainly they were better than just listening to lectures. I do know I must practice and there is still much to learn. 3: The Museums - they are wonderful. 4: Sitting with the other students during homework and having everyone so absorbed in the process of collation and format. I also loved doing the collation - it's almost as good as doing crosswords. The Binding Museum was also a highlight for me. 5: Being able to work with people who really know their business and learning from the best possible sources. 6: The course as a whole was very enjoyable. The best parts were the hands-on experience (including the Museums) and having other people (students, lab instructors, and faculty) to discuss problems with and get advice from. 7: The apparent love for the courses that the RBS staff and director have. The depth of knowledge one can plunge into for basically anything about the book is inspiring. 8: The hands-on aspects of homework and labs. 9: Its sense of fun. 10: Working with books, formulating and collating. 11: Labs. 12: The fact that I was able to accomplish it. Also, enjoyed the humor and the supplied vittles exceeded my expectations - nice touches. 13: The arrangement of the course is wonderful: theory in the form of lectures; example in the Museums; practice in the homework; and reinforcement of what we've learned and deepening of the knowledge through the labs. 14: Collegiality, UVa environment, people - all contributed to make this immersion into Desbib as fine as possible. 15: Descriptive bibliography and the Printing Museum were the most effective tools to introduce students to wider issues. The best part of the course was the close attention that one received from lab instructors and the sense of intellectual enterprise that arose from the critical discussion of the format and collation exercises. Tutorial teaching is hard to find. 16: Learning a technique that can help me in my research and in my professional duties. 17: Labs. 18: The books and TB's lectures. 19: TB's lectures and the Lab sessions. 20: The homework and Labs. Time alone with the books and a good puzzle to solve. 21: The opportunity to sit down and examine the books as physical objects and attempt to describe them. 22: Content and TB as an instructor; I hadn't had him before. 23: At work, I often seem alone with my beliefs about the book and how one uses it, &c. Here I found many like souls. 24: The hands-on exercises (i.e., the three boxes of stuff!). There could have been even more of that. 25: Homework, hands-on experiences, and the Museums. 26: The sense of community: knowing there are people who feel as passionately about these subjects as I do. 27: Hands-on experience. Multiple examples (I need repetition!). The large teaching staff. 28: The Labs (3-D Carter, too). I found the collections to be an invaluable learning resource. 29: 1) Collation Labs, 2) Museum, 3) Lectures. 30: The give and take at the lab and Museum sessions. 31: What makes the book so interesting is the fact that so many different components go into it. I enjoyed learning about the background of a book and the necessity of comparison. 32: Lots of homework. TB's lectures. 33: The variety of approaches to the topic: lecture, Lab, Museum. 34: It is impossible to answer. Everything was praiseworthy. Creativity, organization, quality of instructors, quality of examples, physical evidence, environment, resources, synchronization. 35: The stimulating environment, both physical and intellectual. |
|
9. How could the course have been improved?>
1: TB and RN: Keep teaching your lab instructors - with a class this large you can't always be on hand for a tough question. 3: At risk of sounding lazy, some slightly shorter books to collate, so that we would have more time to do it really well. Some were extremely long, though they did give one a strong sense of accomplishment on completing collation and, especially, pagination. 4: Those spindle back chairs in Clemons were truly uncomfortable. Also, you might suggest than anyone over about 45 bring a magnifying glass - I could have used one several times. 5: I think that using fewer books and examining them over an extended period, i.e., Book A, Day 1, format and collation; Book A, Day 2, statement of signing, pagination, &c. 6: I think it might be interesting to follow one book or group of books through the entire process of format, collation, signing, &c., just to see how the formula builds. I know different examples are needed to show different things, but some of the books took so long to do, like the one with more than a thousand pages that we used for the pagination exercise. It would have been nice to spread that one out over several days. 7: How can you escape Bowers. TB must rewrite that book!!! 8: Have more hours in the day? Rename The Gospel according to St. Fredson? 9: Maybe just one hour of collation explanation before the first homework - Bowers is a hard read. 10: More time. Better explanation/translation of Bowers (but what bibliographer wouldn't like that?). 11: Please take the camera away from JD. 12: Frustrating in not being able to spend more time with and gain more knowledge about the books used in lab. 13: Incorporating more information about other national printing practices to counter the Anglocentric presentation in Bowers and, to some extent, also in the lectures. 14: More time for us to work on collation with (or without) instructors circulating. 17: See no.6, above. 18: Better schedule for Blue, as mentioned. 19: I don't believe that it can be improved. It is already a stellar course. 20: The course was truly excellent. Its remarkable design makes it valuable to the beginner and (according to classmates) the moderately experienced. A few suggestions: consider five books per Lab. Make Bowers a more accessible reference. The index to Chapter 5 is helpful; we need ones for other chapters. Advise students to buy their own copies (I brought our library copy) so that they can mark and highlight. Consider collaborative problem solving within a cohort for some books. We could have learned from each other. 21: Have remedial sessions for people during homework hours for people who are truly struggling. It appeared as if one group actually had this, and I was tempted to move closer so I could listen. 22: Separate out true beginners from the more knowledgeable people, only for homework and Labs. Have students bring their own lightscope to class (a handy tool to have at work, too). 23: Two weeks. 24: Utilize Friday a bit better (another box). 26: Friday's schedule confused me - remind the students on Thursday that Labs won't be meeting at the usual time. 27: Allowing a portion of the lecture sessions for questions and discussion. Seeing rather than hearing the quasi-facsimile transcriptions of texts. 28: I am not sure how I feel about Lab work where TAs are instructed not to answer questions, but I suppose poring and re-poring over Bowers was a useful learning tool. 29: The addition of the Lab notebook, discussion, Museum examples of cancels, and smaller collation Lab groups are all improvements that have been made since I took this course in 1995. I am sure improvements will continue. 30: We could have used a better prepared lab leader. 31: There is never enough time. 32: A more engaged lab instructor. Maybe a lecture from RN on Thursday telling us what we should have learned during the labs? 33: I was sorry to see the light wands go. Also, though the creation of cohorts was perhaps a logistical necessity, I found it limited your interaction with others in the course. This is likely also due to the size. But I found the smaller class (12 people) to be more congenial (perhaps an obvious point). 34: Tiny suggestion: show a map of the days ahead in the form of examples from a variety of bibliographies, and not just of collation, but inclusive of pagination, content, &c. 35: Besides being contrite and saying something like "By making it never-ending," it was really quite satisfactory. |
|
10. 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: Intense and energizing. 2: I enjoyed the Sunday night dinner and videos, a good way to meet people. Lectures were great. I was glad to have a chance to see a few of the booksellers in town - thank you for the transportation. You might give the Sunday afternoon tour another time during the week. 3: I must have missed the Alderman digital tour (pity). The general tour was useful (also for meeting people), as was the dinner (fun, too). The making of a Renaissance book was a great video, and I hope you do get to remake it. The printing demonstration (and, especially, trying it myself) was a highlight. I enjoyed two of the three lectures, the other (no.400), I wasn't wildly impressed with, but: Oh, well. A more scholarly oriented talk on bibliography for one lecture would be an improvement for me. 4: Enjoyed Brett Charbeneau's talk immensely, and the other two also. Being able to operate the press was fun, and the Rotunda exhibit was interesting. Bookseller Night is something I would not do again, and I could take or leave the videos - the best being A matter of fact. 5: Very good. 6: I enjoyed all the activities. My favorites were Bookseller Night and BC's Wednesday talk. 7: Liked the tour. All dinners of this type have a certain quality that can't be escaped. I would highly suggest that students flying in from the West arrive on Saturday. There's not enough room for morning coffee in the hallway. 8: The Rotunda exhibition is excellent, Sunday night (and daily breakfasts and coffee breaks) were very well handled. Videos were also worthwhile. No time for the rest, literally. 9: The Rotunda exhibition was fabulous - I did not do Bookseller Night because I had to work on my homework, so that was a little disappointing, but ... life is choice. 10: Too busy collating and formulating. Went out very little. Roger Stoddard's speech was a tedious book report. BC's was one of the best given at RBS - relevant and entertaining. 11: I did not attend many of these activities, but TB's discussion of the 25-year history of BAP helped me put much of what I saw and heard this week in context. 12: I didn't have time for Bookseller Night; Sunday night dinner and the evening lectures were enhancing and appreciated. 13: All were icing on a delicious cake. 14: Unlike most of the comments I heard, I found RS's lecture on Jabès remarkable and unexpected. Equally remarkable was BC's courage and determination. 17: RBS was clearly very well planned. All activities were relevant and informal. A lot of thought and care has gone into planning the extras. 18: Everything I did was fine, but I did skip the printing demo and Booksellers Night in order to work. 19: These activities were great opportunities to meet people with similar interests, and I hope will be continued in future RBS sessions. 20: They were thoroughly enjoyable. More context/historic background for the uninitiated in the RS lecture would have been helpful. BC and TB were excellent. 21: There wasn't a lot of time for this, as I always seemed busy doing my homework! 22: This was the first time I didn't go to Booksellers Night or all of the lectures because of the amount of time I felt I needed to spend to complete the homework. (I missed the receptions, too - wine wouldn't have helped.) 23: Enjoyed them all. Jabès did not become my favorite author, though. 24: Didn't do much of that this week - enjoyed RS's presentation immensely, as well as BC's talk. 25: Sunday tour and dinner were great to help meet each other and create a sense of welcome. Videos help illustrate, but made for very rushed lunches. Evening lectures did not necessarily help, but were appreciated. Bookseller Night was OK, as was viewing the Alderman centers. The Rotunda exhibit and printing demonstration were excellent - I always wanted to work a press. 26: All were great. The only thing I'd suggest is a gallery talk for the Rotunda show. 27: The Sunday night dinner offers a convivial chance to meet , a very useful opportunity. The videos work in well - somehow, calling it Dinner and the Movies was a motivator more appropriate to the wine and food and talk than emphasizing the instructional value just then, however great it is. Desbib is lousy for Bookseller Night! Printing and exhibits are necessary reinforcements to course work. 28: Loved the printing demo. Rotunda exhibit was very nice: well, all of it was. I'm sorry I didn't make the tour. 29: Booksellers Night, evening lectures, and the printing demo were very interesting. 30: There has been a host of enjoyable high class activities. The Sunday dinner could be improved by providing places where all could sit (I don't know where you could hold it). 31: Lectures and Bookseller Night were good. Printing demonstration in Memorial Hall was interesting - makes you appreciate the hand press results even more. Also points out the fact of the importance of a printing press in wartime when paper was scarce - what a broadside can do for patriotism. (This is beside the point, but when a printer from Williamsburg is here, you tend to think of these things and Revolutionary times.) 32: The first lecture was dull, pretentious, and had some of the worst French I've ever heard. Bookseller Night was good fun, as was BC's lecture. 33: Thorough and well-planned and catered. 34: Lectures were wonderful. It was a privilege to hear RS and BC. I am very appreciative of attending the 25th anniversary of RBS and finally knowing its history first hand. Congratulations! 35: VERY enjoyable. I only wish I had been able to hear some of the lectures from previous weeks before I arrived (perhaps offering them on cassette for purchase?). |
|
11. 1: Highly recommended. 2: Need to do the pre-course reading. There's so little time that one can not afford not to have read in advance. Thank you for a great week! 3: Yes (and so will my institution). Thank you. 4: The pre-course readings are important. Don't be intimidated by the reading or the reputation of the course! I did get my money's worth - I now see my collection in a whole new light, not as content, but containers. This will keep me busy for years - I wasn't that excited about the content anyway - but as containers and physical objects, the books in my collection are fabulous (my opinion, anyway). 5: I definitely got my money's worth. Hope to give some back to RBS for what it's given me. 6: It's a great course, definitely worth the money. You learn a lot in one far too short week. Believe it when they say you have to do the advance reading to get through this course. 7: Get here early if flying from the West, preferably on Saturday. Don't despair over Bowers, it will get explained. You definitely get your money's worth here. TB and his staff are wonderful. 8: Sign up early and put in your Bowers time; it pays off in the end. Equation: 10-year-old boy: summer camp=book collector: RBS! 9: Advice: don't expect to see the town this week. I got my money's worth, and more, and so did my institution. 11: Come prepared. I got at least my money's worth (but then, my employer paid for it all). Seriously, I think my employer will also get his money's worth from this. 12: Absolutely. One must be aware of the necessary complete submersion and be prepared to give in to it. Thank you from a new genuine as well as financial RBS friend! 13: Absolutely! This has been an exciting and fulfilling week for me. Vast areas of analytical bibliography have been presented to me in a manner that has allowed me to learn and retain large amounts of information and be able to ask intelligent questions about topics I knew nothing about five days ago. Thank you very much! 14: If you work with rare books, you must take this course. Absolutely got my money's worth. 15: As the brochure says, do the reading ahead of time or you will be wasting your time (this is no exaggeration). 16: I always tell my colleagues that the RBS courses are wonderful because of the lack of pressure that usually accompanies the usual graduate school course. There is no pressure to compete with other students of posture in that post-baccalaureate manner than can totally cancel out whatever content a course/curriculum had. That is valuable to me. 17: Yes. I would encourage any serious rare book person to come here. 18: Bring a calculator to eliminate leaf count mistakes. Yes (even though it wasn't my money). 19: I definitely got my money's worth and hope to be back. 20: Yes. I am very glad I did the reading before I came. I will strongly encourage more conservators to take the course. I may require it for my students. 21: This course is a rite of passage. Take it! 22: Don't let the greater experience of others in your class, or the attitude of your Lab instructor, intimidate you. Even coming in with no prior knowledge, you are going to learn a great deal. 23: Last question first: Yes. First question: Desbib is a great course for descriptive bibliography, but also as an overview of the History of the Book. This helps, in the classes, labs, homework labs, and talks outside the homework, to place the book in context throughout the centuries. I may never read another book. I would tell anyone taking this course not to plan it as a vacation, but to plan to be given a better education than they've had in a long time. I can't think of anyone who could come here, faculty or student, who wouldn't go away having learned something. I look forward to next year and to many years after that. 24: Definitely got my money's worth. Also, I will join the Friends as soon as I get back home (did not bring a checkbook) - I promise! Also, see my notes/suggestions about recycling, &c. They are not criticism, just suggestions. Thanks to the BAP staff and food management - everyone was helpful, friendly, and kind. Hope to be back! 25: To echo the words of past students, READ, READ, READ. Don't attend this course without reading the material. Don't expect to be able to read the material when you are here. [On a personal note - I am a sissy and descriptive bibliography is for me.] 26: Advice: Do you like puzzles and detective work? Are you interested in intricate systems of order you've been exposed to but never aware of? Collation demands yesses to both. It's a big part - bigger that issue vs. state, &c. - of the course. But there's much more to the course. The biggest prerequisite is a passionate interest in and respect for books. Not the ideas they contain, but the physical object. Summary thought: it will be lonely back home. 27: Aids to extracting fundamental tools from the vastness of Bowers would help - just reading it is one part helpful, one part cause for panic, and one part soporific! Yes on the $worth! 28: I got much more than my money's worth. You already adequately scare people into the preliminary reading, but they may not know how quickly they will be sent to the book and told, "OK, now you may begin collating." 29: This was my second time through Desbib. I really enjoyed the course and learned a great deal. Anyone considering taking this course could benefit from starting to read Bowers as soon as possible. The course was exceptional value for money spent. 30: If anyone should ask me, I would tell them that if they have the time and money, like some brain exercise, and like meeting interesting people, come! This has been a vacation for me in a truly beautiful spot. Even the food is great! It's Greenbrier without golf. 31: For me and for other people - prepare to work hard and harder and to do the reading. Yes, I learned so much that I don't think I'll ever get it sorted, but it will make the looking at a book much more informative and intelligent. 32: I absolutely got my money's worth, and I will recommend this course to my fellow grad students. I would also like to recommend Café Europa and Take It Away as great eateries for those on a budget. 33: I would recommend it. I feel the money (not mine) was well spent. 34: My only concern is that a potential student would not be able discern the value of the course by just reading a paragraph of description - I was not sure how the course would help me. Now I don't know how I could have continued without it. Thank you! Thank you! 35: I would recommend this highly to anyone with a serious love of books beyond the information they contain. I feel profoundly struck by this course and want to pursue other courses in this field, either through my current employer or on my own. YES, I got more, way more than my money's worth. My advice for those preparing for this course would be not to try to (or think that you HAVE to) completely digest Bowers before you come to RBS. Not to get intimidated by him, or, more correctly, by his style, and feel helpless. The video is essential - I only wonder about the sequel on collation - was it ever made? Is it available? Perhaps, relating back to Bowers, and I say this at least half seriously, TB should come out with a book-on-tape version (uncut, of course) of Principles of bibliographical description. Of course, there might be a packaging problem. |
| Number of respondents: 35 (one student did not respond) |
|
| There were 35 students responding: eight general librarians with some rare book duties (23%), seven antiquarian booksellers (20%), six rare book librarians (17%), two archivist/manuscript librarians (6%), two book collectors (6%), two conservator/binder/preservation librarians (6%), two full-time students (6%), and one each an art and artifacts curator, enrolled because of a non-professionally-related interest, a rare book/manuscript/archivist librarian, a retiree, and spouse of a book collector (3% each). |