1) How useful were the pre-course readings? 1: Sort of useful - they didn't necessarily have to be read before the course started. Reflecting the nature of the literature, some media were more adequately covered than others. 2: As a late enrollee, I lacked the time to actually read the materials I hadn't seen before, but recognized a few (having read them before) and did look at a few of the new items. 3: They were very useful as an introduction to topics that were covered in the course. 4: They were a good introduction to the course material, broadening the course description. Because PNB referred to the readings in class, the foundation that they provided was helpful. 5: They were more useful following classroom discussion. 6: They were helpful in preparation for the lectures on the in-dividual topics, but even more so in helping me to see the big picture and common issues/questions. 7: It is nice to have the bibliography, but it was not necessary to have read them prior to the course. 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. The bibliographies from RBS courses are always one of the most valuable parts. I do wish that this bibliography were longer. 2: Yes - they will be compre-hendible now that I've had some prior knowledge. 3: Yes - relevant and useful. We received a list of additional readings in class and I plan to obtain these when I get back to work. 4: They will definitely be useful in the future. So much information was relayed that the follow up and detail that the readings will offer will be very valuable. 5: We lacked a daily schedule of course topics. 6: Yes. 7: The list of resources was helpful - especially URL's. The handout on video formats through the ages will be useful. 3) Was the intellectual level of the course content appropriate? 1: Yes. The various media were explained with just enough technical detail that non-scientists could understand the preservation concerns without being overwhelmed. 2: Yes - not too technical, but in depth. Explanations were in terms and diagrams even I could understand! 3: Yes - the instructor assumed a certain level of the class's knowledge. He did not talk down to us, nor did he talk above our heads. 4: Yes. It was interesting to see the different experiences and questions that the class members brought to the table. PNB is so knowledgeable and gracious with the range of material covered; because of his great expertise, his explanations could have been daunting, but he unfailingly made the information accessible to all. 5: Yes - the instruction always required full attention and full consideration. 6: Yes - I did have some of the material in a previous course on preservation in library school (seven years ago), yet each topic in this course was covered in greater depth and I found it to be of great relevance to my work. 7: Yes - terms were explained; problems were explained from the beginning. 4) If your course had field trips, were they effective? 1: We took a last-minute field trip to the Special Collections stacks, which was very edifying and interesting (I am always very interested in how other libraries do things), although only some of what we saw were non-book media. 2: Yes (but I'm biased since I led the tour of the Special Collections stacks to show what we are doing right/wrong in regard to storing materials discussed in class). 3: Yes - we got an excellent overview of the challenges of Special Collections during our short field trip. 4: Yes. Our short foray into the UVa Special Collections stacks provided additional graphic examples of problems and solutions that had been discussed. 5: The field trip reinforced classroom instruction. 6: N/A. 7: The short trip to the stack area of Special Collections was helpful. I always find some new way to handle a problem whenever I visit another library's stack area. 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: I believe that the course descriptions were not very clear at all about what would be covered, especially the balance of old/new media. It is a measure of the enormity of the problems we face that we all came anyway, hoping for advice to fit our particular needs. At least, the specific media covered might be listed in the ECD. 2-3: Yes. 4: Yes. Everything that I expected from the course was addressed, and I'm leaving with many ideas. 5: Yes - the course title should include the word Preservation. 6: Yes. 7: I had the feeling that the topics covered this year related to what collections are in the home institutions of the attendees. 6) What did you like best about the course? 1: The quality of the instructor, who was able to describe the technologies, their problems, and preservation "solutions" (and their problems) as clearly as possible, with such a variety of ever-evolving media. I was delighted by the inclusion of computer-output media, which I hadn't even thought of from a conservation standpoint. 2: A great deal of emphasis was given to what one should consider in evaluating A/V materials for preservation. That approach makes information relevant to the collections I administer, rather than just hearing about how they do it at another library. 3: Learning about media that I have in my collection, but have had no training in, specifically, dynamic media. I also thought that the discussions of management were excellent. 4: Good answers to questions; the range of possible solutions to problems; the discussion of impediments to the expensive ideal. In a word, the wealth of very practical information. 5: The thoughtful presentation. 6: It would be hard to pick out any one aspect of the course that I liked best, yet I did come away with a number of ideas as to how procedures for storing and preserving archival material could be improved at my own workplace. I am looking forward to implementing them. 7: The discussion of environmental issues. 7) How could the course have been improved? 1: It was clear that this was a beta test for the class. PNB was editing his lecture notes as he went along, pointing out where he needed to reorganize. It was a lot of media to cover, some in more or less coherent groups; in order to describe first the technology of each kind of thing, then preservation concerns, then possible solutions, there was a certain amount of repetition. The part on magnetic media, in particular, got a little murky. It would have been nice to get more specific housing suggestions and lists of suppliers of equipment and supplies. I would have liked even more sharing of what media our collections hold and what we're doing with them - we had, for example, a very enlightening comparison of experiences with oversize boxes. 2: Some of the illustrations were tables, graphs, &c. It would be helpful to produce them as photocopies for handing out - it's difficult to get comprehensive notes while trying to hear the commentary. 3: I would have enjoyed hearing more about the challenges faced by my fellow classmates. The class was small enough that I think there would have been time for more class participation. 4: I think that, as this was the maiden voyage for this course, the second time around will be more fluid. Not that it was poorly balanced or arranged, but - I'd like to be back at the second convening. 5: The course - with many topics that are now expanding in scope - will need its focus narrowed to newer media. 7: A light switch that worked with consistency and didn't turn off the lights for no apparent reason. I would have liked a more balanced approach - too much time was spent on photographs; objects were barely mentioned. 8) We are always concerned about the physical well-being both of the BAP's 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? 1: N/A. 2: I was surprised that materials were used in buildings outside of Alderman (fortunately, there was no rain!). 3: No suggestions - little or no material was used. 4: N/A. 6-7: N/A. 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, &c. 1: I love the video night, but the LC video was overly long. Would it be possible for one of the receptions to be somewhere else, say the MacGregor Room (if they do that sort of thing there) or the lobby, or, well, anywhere? 3: All of the outside activities were excellent. They augmented the course well, making this week an immersion experience into the field. I found this very enjoyable. I also made some new friends, and made contacts with other professionals, which I believe is an important component of any continuing education program. 4: I participated in everything during this, my first RBS session. It's a full schedule of activity, and a tiring one, but there is valuable and enjoyable interaction between class sessions and I'm glad that I tried it all. There is certainly a festival atmosphere. 5: These experiences are enriched by the good humor and interesting nature of the participants - I suspect this is an important component of their success. 6: The tour guide on the Sunday tour was a little vague on some of the details about living in campus housing (e.g., where is the laundry? &c.), and being better prepared could help. As far as the social gatherings, well, rare books people can be a clubby bunch, and if you don't work in an academic library or have a great deal of familiarity with the rare book scene, it's easy to feel like an outsider. 7: The Book of Kells video was only shown during the first week - I would like to have seen it. 10) Any final thoughts? Did you get your money's worth? 1: We learned this week that the newer media - from photography to digital information - is all at incredible risk. It really is vital for special collections to recognize the problems and look at their collections - now. This course is tremendously useful to give an idea of how to evaluate and decide where to start. 3: I definitely got my money's worth. It will take ages to use all the great ideas I got from this course. I recommend the RBS experience highly. 4: Definitely do the reading beforehand. Come with questions. Be prepared to take good notes. Yes, it was extremely worthwhile, both personally and for the institution that sent me. 5: I consider this subject area closer to RBS work with electronic texts and with remote learning systems for special collections access. It's useful for collection management. 6: I did get my money's worth. I have been looking for a course like this since starting my present job a year and a half ago. PNB did a fine job. 7: I felt that I had got my money's worth at the end of the first day. Number of respondents: 7 PERCENTAGES Leave Tuition Housing Travel Institution gave me leave 86% Institution paid tuition 71% Institution paid housing 72% Institution paid travel 72% I took vacation time 0% I paid tuition myself 0% I paid for my own housing 14% I paid for my own travel 14% N/A: Self-employed, retired, or had time off 14% N/A: Self-employed, retired, or exchange 29% N/A: Stayed with friends or lived at home 14% N/A: Lived nearby 14% There were two (29%) archivist/manuscript librarians, two (29%) conservator/binder/preservation librarians, one (14%) general librarian with some rare book duties, one (14%) rare book librarian, and one (14%) rare book/archivist/manuscript librarian.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]