Conservation News
1. Which parts of CN do you value most highly? (8 = most, 1 = least)
Features:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
News:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Book Reviews:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Editorial:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Conference Reports:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Sections:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Letters:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Workshop Notes:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Which if any parts would you like to see
2. More of?
Features
News
Book Reviews
Editorial
Conference Reports
Sections
Letters
Workshop Notes
3. Less
of?
Features
News
Book Reviews
Editorial
Conference Reports
Sections
Letters
Workshop Notes
(to select more than one, hold down the Ctrl
key while clicking on your choices)
4. Within the Section reports, which do you tend to read?
"Your" section:
"Your" section plus a few others:
Dip into any of them:
None:
5. What is your main Section?
Archaeology
Ceramics and Glass
Ethnography
Furniture and Wood
Gilding and Decorative Surfaces
Metals
Paintings
Photographic Materials
Stained Glass
Stone and Wall Paintings
Textiles
I have not specified a Section
I'm not currently a UKIC Member
6. Do you like the division of reports on a Section-by-Section basis?
Yes:
No:
7. Do you think conference reports and book reviews should stay within
the Section reports or would they be better in the body of CN?
Stay within the Section reports:
or Better in the body of CN:
8. What changes, if any, would you like to see in the content of
those reports?
9. Do you feel the present content of CN is
Too long?
Too short?
Just right?
Photographs:
10a. Are there enough? Yes:
No:
10b. Is their quality good enough? Yes:
No:
11. Would you welcome photographs in colour, provided the additional
cost to UKIC is modest? Yes:
No:
12. Do you feel the style and content of CN reflects the kind
of organisation UKIC ought to be?
Yes:
No:
13. Comments?
14. If "No", is that because you think UKIC should be different
or because just CN should be different, or both?
UKIC should be different:
or Just CN should be different:
or Both should be different:
15. If UKIC/CN/both should be different, how should UKIC/CN/both
be different?
News coverage
16. Is the news coverage Not enough?
Too much?
About right?
17. Would you like more news which is relevant but possibly tangential
to conservation, e.g. about museums, galleries, libraries and archives;
developments in government departments, e.g. DCMS, EH, Historic Scotland?
Yes:
No:
Don't mind:
18. CN currently carries no news about paper/parchment/books (this
being the province of IPC and Society of Archivists)
Would you welcome an insight into that territory?
Yes:
Short Abstract & Source:
No:
Don't mind:
19. What else would you like covered which is not?
Format, presentation:
20. What if any changes would you welcome?
Frequency:
21. We are thinking of combining CN and GV into a single bi-monthly
publication.
Do you approve?
Disapprove?
Don't mind?
Grapevine
22. Please grade how useful you find Grapevine (5=very useful, 1=not
at all useful) :
5
4
3
2
1
What if anything would you welcome more of or less of?
23. More of:
24. Less of:
25. Please use this space for any additional comments
you wish to make on either publication
The Web site
26. Are you aware that CN and GV are available
on the UKIC website? Yes:
No:
27. Do you read CN or GV on the web? CN:
GV:
28. If you read either on the web, do you also read the printed
versions? Yes:
No:
29. If not previously, would you now read them on the web? Yes:
No:
30. Any other comments about the Web site?
You
Please complete if you wish to enter the prize draw ,
or if you are happy for us to contact you:
Your name :
Your institution or business :
Your telephone number
and
e-mail address
What other professional or other conservation-based newsletters or
periodicals do you read?
Your contribution
31. Have you ever written an item for CN? Yes:
No:
32. Would you write an item if you had something to write about?
Yes:
No:
33. If "yes", may we approach you on occasion for a contribution?
Yes:
No:
Now, please read the Data Protection Statement before submitting this
form...
Data Protection Statement
The data submitted using this form will be held
on computer and processed solely to enable UKIC to review its publications
strategy for Conservation News , Grapevine and the Web
site . If you have chosen not to submit your name and contact details,
your responses will be held as anonymous data and thus do not come under
the terms of the UK Data Protection Act 1998. If you have submitted
your name and contact details, these will only be used to contact you
in relation to this survey and the prize draw and, if you have answered
"yes" to the final question, to approach you for a possible
contribution or contributions to UKIC publications. None of this data,
whether anonymous or including personal details, will be passed to any
third party, except that the anonymised aggregate results of this survey
may be made publicly available at some time in the future, and the prize
draw winner's details will be passed to Routledge to enable the delivery
of the prize. The Data Controller for this activity is UKIC. If you
have any concerns about the processing of this data please contact UKIC
using any of the following means:
Post:
UKIC
109 The Chandlery
50 Westminster Bridge Road
London SE1 7QY
E-mail: [email protected]
Tel: 020 7721 8721
Fax: 020 7721 8722