Ringing Forums

Ah, the robot plagiarist, yet again :roll: What's the point of this post please? It's just regurgitated content from people with an actual intellect.

A quick look at this year's first pealers summary on Pealbase shows that out of 130 so far just 15 rang Plain Bob Minor; there were 10 Plain Bob Triples; 10 Grandsire Triples, 9 Plain Bob Major and 23 of Surprise Major. There were even 2 ringing Surprise Royal for their first peal. — Roger Booth

Hmm, I crunched the numbers by stage irrespective of method - I discounted the one handbell peal and the numbers for up to Minor and above Minor are 64 / 65, so pretty evenly spread. Minor versus Major was 38 / 35 and Double versus Triples was 25 / 21.

I think your points about "the skills gap" and "risk aversion" are on the money, along with bands getting stuck at the PB5 level. Plus your points about people getting there eventually, and advanced ringing being outside traditional structures - basically I think everything that you said is right. :grin:

However I'm a bit cautious about using peals or even QPs as a measure of ringing's general health, although they are one of the few data sources available. It seems like a badly lagging indicator - as you've said many peals are currently rung by ringers who are at the tail end of their careers, and there's a long lead time for towers like mine, which is building from a CC start, to ringing QPs as a tower band - if indeed we ever do. But we are nonetheless making more progress than the band has in 40+ years, even though it's impossible to determine that from outside. I think that's one area where a survey will help - not just details of what level bands are at now, but also in which direction they are heading.

The difference between young and old is that the young give up if they don't become rapidly competent whereas the old are more persistent so there are more of them to count as struggling. — John Harrison

I think you are have nailed an important truth there, one that tends to reinforce the confirmation bias about older ringers. It's overly simplistic to assume that there's a single factor at play in the problems different categories of learners face, or that if we could just recruit more young ringers everything would get better.

It's the other way round. First peal's these days tend to be in the higher stages e.g. more major and less minor. — Roger Booth

Wow, that's the opposite of what I'd expected - I've been learning minor because that's pretty much all that's available, due to the falling number of suitable practices in the area, and the falling numbers of people at those practices.

There has been a recent effort in one of the associations round here to run twice monthly joint Surprise Minor + Major practices, to help "bring on" people wanting to get into that level of ringing. It pretty quickly morphed into practice sessions for existing Surprise Major ringers to brush off the COVID rust and ring some new methods. The Minor bit ended up with all the learners stuffed in together into just a few plain courses, with the inevitable consequences. Needless to say I've stopped going. I appreciate the intentions but quite often association "Organisation of training sessions" consists of arranging a tower, getting someone to conduct and sending out an email. That's insufficient, there needs to be an identification of individual needs, a plan to address them, homework, goals etc. rather than just "Please turn up and we'll wing it".

With the squeezed middle, it is also more difficult than it used to be to find a band — Roger Booth

Just so - finding 5 ringers to support a QP can be tricky enough, 7 is even harder. Surprising therefore that most first peals tend to be major, it would be interesting to find out why. Perhaps some of that market research stuff... :wink:

all of the financial side, including the multiple VAT reclaims, was done by the PCC treasurer so we had separation and accountability. I'm not sure if ropes were itemised on an invoice although they were in the schedule of works. I can ask the PCC treasurer.

You provided our ropes but that was done indirectly by Blyth & Co who did the rehang and ordered them from you for us. The ropes hadn't arrived by the end of the project so we refitted the old ones and when the new ones arrived I fitted them. But I have no documentary evidence for that.

Ah yeah, I'd missed that there's a minimum of £1k. But I've listened to a few bands where I could believe that was a realistic spend :joke:

Presumably this will affect replacement stays as well.

In the case of peal ringing this is now quite marked — Roger Booth

As well as the decrease in the number of first peals, do you know if there has also been a change in the stages at which they are rung, e.g. more Minor and less Major?

Do you know to what extent (if any) the same trend has been reflected in QPs? As a relatively recent ringer, QPs are on my radar but I'm not interested in ringing peals, am I alone or is that a change in preferences part of the reason for the drop in first peals?

we seem to have a squeezed middle, with a missing generation or two of competent change-ringers, and lots of bands struggling to ring plain hunt, let alone steady Plain Bob or Grandsire doubles — Roger Booth

From my experience I think that's right. That gap is a double whammy - not only does it mean there's a set of ringers missing, it means that people currently coming along behind them can really struggle to get the support they need to keep making progress.

many of those who have recently taken up ringing are keen to make progress, and to become competent change-ringers, as they see it as a rewarding pastime. However nowadays many do not get the same opportunities to meet their aspirations, that their predecessors had. — Roger Booth

Yes, much as per above, that mirrors my experience. Most of my progress from PB5 to Surprise Minor has involved use of a tower sim, then "polishing up" with a band on the other side of Greater Manchester who have been kind enough to take me under their wing, but it's not been easy.

Although I'm a late starter, I've seen the same issues I've had affect people who have started young and as a consequence they've stalled in just the same way that received wisdom says older learners do. "Older learners take longer and don't get as far" may be true in part but I think it's used as a convenient and self-fulfilling excuse. Lack of support infrastructure affects everyone who takes up ringing, if support isn't available then it doesn't matter how young and gifted learners are, they are not going to progress as far or as fast as they are capable of.

constantly rubbished by the dyed-in-the-wool conservatives who "defend" the inner sancta of FCR. — Mike Shelley

You keep repeating that but I've seen no signs of it here, people have just shared their opinions and pointed out some issues. I assume you've have had bad experiences elsewhere (RW?) but I don't think it's relevant to keep re-airing them here.

ah sorry Jason, I didn't scroll back to the beginning of the thread!

Bearing in mind where ringing is now, and the fact that another survey is being planned, I think the answer to your questions seems clear. Hopefully this time round, some action will come out of it, as you say.

Some resources:

• https://cccbr.org.uk/resources/recruitment-and-retention/
• http://ringingteachers.org/resources/recruitment-and-retention

Individual associations may also have material available, e.g. https://derbyda.org.uk/resources/promoting-ringing/

Sorry to reopen this thread after so long, — Jason Carter

This topic has popped up again recently and there's quite a long thread on the subject here, which I think you might find interesting.

we train them to watch for the bell to follow [and] ... we build in a reflex to only ring your own bell once you have spotted the bell to follow

Ugh, yes, what you first tell people sticks and is incredibly difficult wean them off. I remember after one particularly disastrous attempt at PH, where everyone was holding up waiting for everyone else, someone saying "If I didn't wait it would all go wrong" :gasp:

The exercises you mention sound good but I think might be beyond the abilities of many bands, I think you'd need everyone except the learner to be pretty competent for them to work. What I have done for getting people used to speed changes is to use the simulator. I tie two bells, silence the one the learner is on in the sim and then I ring PH on the other one. They then "shadow" me, so all they have to concentrate on is speed control.

The other revealing exercise is to put people who can already PH on the sim, my experience is lots of them don't hold up enough coming off the lead, or get the bell in properly coming off the back. They then spend the rest of the time between front and back getting back into approximately the right place - it was a salutary lesson for me the first time I tried it!

The idea that you can't change the speed below the balance doesn't hold — John Harrison

I must confess I've been puzzled by this bit of the discussion. I went on an advanced bell handling course where it was explained that for a ring of bells the light bells might be having to ring up to the balance at the same time as the heavy ones were completely below the balance, because of the difference in weights / sizes / swing periods.

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree. Claiming that chiming is a major, missed source of recruitment for full circle ringing is I believe an overreach.

the on-going dismissal of frame chiming turns a blind eye to the opportunity offered by many hundreds more towers than CCCBR seems minded to utilise for recruitment. — Mike Shelley

You seem to be saying there's some sort prejudice against chiming? According to Dove there are 254 towers in the UK with an Ellacombe versus 6022 full circle rings, or about 4%. It's great that you are keen on chiming but it's not realistic to suggest that it is an entry point into full circle ringing.

before taking up bellringing I played group percussion to a high standard, but handbell ringing doesn't appeal to me, although I appreciate performances such as the recent ASCY dinner one. And yes, if I turn up at a tower bell session, that's sort of what I expect to be doing :wink:

It could be all too easy for someone's theoretical/method knowledge to quickly outstrip their physical ability to ring it on tower bells. Might this be disheartening and turn the person away from tower bell ringing? — Stuart Palin

I was told early on to keep my theoretical knowledge a step ahead of my practical ability. I think it was good advice, I've always had a "next goal" and when trying something new if you understand it well it is one less thing to worry about. But I can see that (say) confusing the hell out of someone with the complexities of spliced whatever when they are trying to learn PB5 could be disheartening, so I think there's is a balance to be struck.

Bob Minor on handbells is achievable pretty quickly by most of those who would subsequently take to change ringing on tower bells. — Simon Linford

Well that's my ringing career finished then... :joke: I'm not a HB ringer, the couple of times I did try (under duress) was after I could already ring a tower bell. Although the patterns are the same, virtually nothing else is. If I'd been introduced to HBs first, I think it would have put me off ringing altogether. One of the big attractions of tower bells was the physicality, which is completely absent from HBs. I'm sure for some people HBs could be a gateway into tower ringing, but for others it could be the opposite.

The student gets the idea of ringing by starting from bell down and in a number of stages goes “higher and higher”, getting familiar with the swing and what the rope does before entering stay bending territory. — Andrew G Smith

Yes, exactly. I started being taught "bell up" at my home tower and then went to an ART tower for lessons where I was taught "bell down", so I experienced both as a learner. I much preferred "bell down", with "bell up" if I fluffed it and the bell dropped it was game over (and very scary) as I had no feel for the bell below the balance and someone had to take the rope from me. With "bell down" I quickly learned to go back into "ringing up" mode if I let the bell drop, so I became "self recovering". I felt a lot safer, and a lot more confident.

We need some stats. Again. — A J Barnfield

We do, but unless they include people who started ringing and no longer do, it would be easy to be misled by them, for example if drop out rates are strongly correlated to age.

The last time I was able to find the ART stats (2019), the cumulative decline in the number of passes between Level 1 and Level 5 was 95%. What I wasn't able to tell was why - was that a reflection of the natural "pipeline" between levels? Was it because people had started and then given up? Or was it that they reached a level they were happy with and dropped out of the ART scheme? It would be helpful to find out; perhaps as well as a general survey of ringers, ART could survey the people who registered in the scheme?