1)How useful were the pre-course readings? 2: Very, but publications that are available on this topic are not extensive and do not provide user-friendly instruction. 3: N/A. 4: Didn't have any pre-course readings. I think we should. [The Web address of the pre-course readings was given in students' admit letters to this course. -Ed.] 5: It was very useful to get an overview of the terminology before the class started. 6: Apropos. 7: Very useful. 8: Very helpful. They provided a good overview and introduction to the topic. 9: Very helpful. 10: Excellent. Extensive orientation was provided. 11: Very good introduction. They prepared me well for what to expect in terminology and level of detail. 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: Absolutely. 2: Yes. 3: Very much so. An extremely impressive, up-to-date handbook with an excellent bibliography. 4: Somewhat useful - but more detail on specific commands, procedures, and key strokes would have been useful. Also, the structure of EAD was useful. 5: Yes, very helpful. 6: Yes. 7: Yes to both. 8: Yes. The workbook was very useful, and probably will be in the future. 9: Yes. I plan to use it as a reference tool in my own encoding and also in teaching others to encode. 10: The course materials were appropriate and useful in class. I anticipate their being useful in the future. 11: Yes, very much so. 3)Was the intellectual level of the course content appropriate? 1-3: Yes. 4: Overall, OK, but a little higher than I expected. 5: Yes. 6: Yes - neither too elementary nor too advanced. 7-8: Yes. 9: Yes; DP was able to negotiate the various experience levels of the participants so that all felt that the course vastly improved their prior knowledge. 10: The intellectual content was appropriate and challenging. 11: Yes, very much so. 4)If your course had field trips, were they effective? 1: N/A. 2: Yes. 3-4: N/A. 6: Yes. 7: N/A. 9: Not relevant. 10: A related visit to the Etext Center was worthwhile. 11: 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? 1-3: Yes. 4: Very well. 5-7: Yes. 8: The content for this section of the course was a bit more basic than the description implied. 9: Yes. 10: Content of the course was as described and followed the course outline. 11: Yes, very much so. 6)What did you like best about the course? 1: DP's approach to teaching - very insightful. 2: Extremely knowledgeable instructor who was very generous in answering questions. 3: Individual help for each participant. 4: Instructor was excellent. PC's were pre-programmed to make the experience very useful. 5: Getting adequate background on EAD and SGML, in addition to practical, hands-on experience. The instructor was extremely knowledgeable and enjoyable. 6: Hands-on practice beginning with the simple and then moving on to the material from my own repository. 7: It thoroughly addressed my questions and problems, and the instructor knew the subject extensively. 8: DP was an excellent teacher. 9: See no.2, above. 10: The instructor was responsive to class questions and anticipated needs of individual levels of orientation to the course material. 11: Thorough introduction and very clear progression into the more advanced techniques. Questions were welcomed and answered in a way which everyone could understand and apply. That sufficient time was provided to try newly learned technical applications in the classroom setting was most appreciated. Encouragement to work together and establish collaborative work with colleagues was most helpful. 7)How could the course have been improved? 1: Not. 2: Use a sample descriptive inventory/register that shows best practice rather than a partial draft. Give a printout to annotate in class and take home. 3: Possibly by employing an assistant to help with individual tutorial sessions. 4: A few more handouts and diagrams would have been useful. 5: A little more hands-on time the last day of class. 6: Maybe a little more timely attention from the instructor - he tended to spend large chunks of time with certain students while others had to wait a while to get a question answered. This delay may have caused a lot of corrections to do to get things straight. 8: I don't know. 9: 0. 10: The course was excellent. A follow-up to explore topics at an intermediate or advanced level would be appropriate. 11: Being located closer to Alderman so that less class time would be taken for trekking to/from breaks. 9)Please comment on the quality/enjoyability of the various RBS activities in which you took part outside of class, eg Sunday afternoon tour, Sunday night dinner and videos, evening lectures, Bookseller Night, tour of the Alderman digital/electronic centers,, etc. 1: N/A. 2: Enjoyed all I attended. I wanted more time at the Electronic Text Center. 3: N/A. 4: Evening lectures were great! Tour of the digital center was very impressive. Morning coffee was great. 5: I participated in Sunday night dinner, videos, a couple of lectures, and Bookseller Night. All were well planned and enjoyable. 6: The Sunday night dinner did not offer sufficient variety (all salads) - not worth the money. 7: A wonderful, unique experience - I enjoyed it all immensely! 8: I enjoyed most of the events, but the receptions and breaks were a little crowded. 9: N/A. 10: Highlights included the Sunday night dinner, evening lectures, digital/electronic center visit, and the Rotunda exhibition. 11: They were of varying levels of interest, but I'm unclear whether they were truly optional. Bookseller Night was a nice convenience, especially with so little free time during the week. 10)Any final thoughts? Did you get your money's worth? 1: Being a neophyte in the world of SGML, HTML, and EAD, I found the first two days of the course intense. During the next two days, I began to see the light at the end of the tunnel. And the last day ... true enlightenment! Oh, perhaps I embellish, but I must say that this course was structured beautifully. I now understand what a powerful tool EAD is, have a great interest in continuing my "post-graduate" work, and am excited at the prospect of implementing EAD at my home archives. 2: Yes, I got my money's worth. 3: I definitely got my money's worth. 4: Excellent program. I will be back! 5: It was well worth the time and expense. 6: I did get my money's worth. 7: It's helpful to have some experience in EAD, even if it's limited, to learn from - a good follow-up to the first attempts and mistakes I made on my own. It's absolutely worth the money! 8: If you're an archivist and you can take it, do. 9: I most definitely got my money's worth. I feel I have a much firmer grounding and deeper understanding of both the process and the intellectual theory behind it. 10: The orientation was effective in getting an overview of a complex activity. Practical application was kept constantly in mind. The cost was well worth the information, social networking, and opportunity to concentrate on the subject. 11: I definitely got my money's worth. I will be able to take what I've learned here and put it to use immediately to further understand the intricacies of EAD. Number of respondents: 11 PERCENTAGES Leave Tuition Housing Travel Institution gave me leave 81% Institution paid tuition 86% Institution paid housing 64% Institution paid travel 64% I took vacation time 0% I paid tuition myself 14% I paid for my own housing 18% I paid for my own travel 18% N/A: Self-employed, retired, or had time off 19% N/A: Self-employed, retired, or exchange 0% N/A: Stayed with friends or lived at home 18% N/A: Lived nearby 18% There were eleven students: nine (81%) were archivist/manuscript librarians, one (9%) was a rare book paraprofessional, and one (9%) was a part-time student with some archival/manuscript duties.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]