Ringing Forums

thanks

1100 ish out of the total of 36,000 ish is only 3%. Do you just carve them out of the initial requirement for a year or two to give more time to think of a longer term solution?

Hi Tina

Well done last night, a useful session.

One of the questions I had coming out of last night was: how many affiliated societies do not have an annual fee which may mean it is going to be difficult for them to support the motion? I am assuming it will be a small minority (either by number of societies or members), but is there a workaround (e.g. a possible grace period of one year where needed) whereby more time could be given to enable those affected societies to get on board? It would seem better to be able to proceed even if only 70-80% could contribute from day 1 rather than need 100% and then the motion doesn't carry, and another year is lost?

I ring for Sunday services because I enjoy ringing. I don't see it as calling people to church. The sound of church bells doesn't make any difference to the numbers attending. Agreed, sometimes when people hear them they are reminded that they need to get to church, if they are attendees. And, people in my village enjoy their sound. I don't see it as a religious act. I ring because I enjoy it. — Phillip George

Interested, given you attend Church as to why you don't see it as a calling from the Church to attend? I don't go to Church, but I always ring on a Sunday, primarily as a message that the Church is there. It is part payback (so I can ring at other times) but I wouldn't naturally ring on a sunday without that aspect, I would probably just ring 1-2 evenings a week...

I think it is not unknown and not completely ignored but declining attendance in churches which have bells (C of E mainly) is also a factor which we struggle to relate to bellringing recruitment.
100 years ago — Lucy Chandhial

Thanks Lucy, so your Elephant is: the continuing and long established decline in congregation numbers (and therefore any historically natural internally generated pipeline of new recruits within the Church) no longer provides the critical mass needed for recruitment and retention as we approach 2030? Which means we need to look beyond the historical catchment area and look towards groups which are not naturally pre-disposed to enter a church building; maybe more secular groups or groups with a different faith, both of which could enjoy ringing (for their own reasons; be that mental physical, social etc) and appreciate at any level, the purpose or value of ringing for Sunday services alongside any practice nights they may also choose to attend?

Boiling it down: Elephant 1 - how do we encourage recruits who are not naturally predisposed to enter a church building? (either because Christianity is not their faith or they have no faith)?

There is no sense in the CCCBR doing ANYTHING which ART has already developed & provided.

As an example ART off lots of guidance on Recruitment & Retention (what more is needed?):
https://ringingteachers.org/index.php?cID=625 — Ken Webb

1. a national marketing campaign - to an extent we need learners to come and find us; with help from the centre.
2. engagement with the current ringing population - lots of people don't know how to go about recruitment, don't read the Ringing World, don't go to any branch or association activities, and haven't heard about ART either.

2. Does an income of £30k or so enable the central organisation to do anything materially different to what it does now? That doesn't allow much for 'paid staff', although it would be a good start. — Simon Linford

By the time you have paid for employers national insurance, pension contributions and a payroll bureau to operate payroll, you are roughly looking at 1 full time employee on national living wage.

A post on the very local FB community page has provided two intakes of learners that are both making good progress and now regularly ring for sunday service. A whatsApp group provides a good bond between the group and rarely a day goes by without some chatter in it.

↪Jason Carter do you mean a simulator practice? Or do you just mean an ordinary practice with bells tied and electronic sound? I assume the latter but the terminology is confusing. — John Harrison

yes I meant a silent practice...

"we" could only ring Plain Bob, Kent, Double Norwich, and maybe Cambridge 8.

"Only". Your starting point is way beyond many of the bands round here. — John de Overa

When I said "we" I meant the exercise as a whole. That is we had to learn to ring advanced methods once upon a time...

fixing my problem wouldn't fix the much larger problem — John de Overa

You have to start somewhere, and you could invite one or two other ringers who also want to progress? If the learners are at different levels, then that would give some variety for the other ringers.

Two towers maybe, either side of a pub lunch?

Once the number of experienced and willing ringers drops below a critical threshold, no amount of "organising" can dig you out of the hole. — John de Overa

Not sure I agree with this. Back in the day, "we" could only ring Plain Bob, Kent, Double Norwich, and maybe Cambridge 8. "We" moved on from this to the standard 8 (and much more) plus, as some still can, some pretty complicated stuff on 10 and 12+.There is absolutely no reason why this cannot happen again, but someone has to organise it. Its about enough people being prepared to do that organising.

I think what you are seeing with your sim practices is the ever widening chasm between "ground floor" ringers and the "surprisers". It's a huge step from PB5 to Camb6/8, not helped by the piss-poor nature of PB as a teaching method compounded by the "by rote" way it is taught. Learning how to learn and how to ring "proper" methods pretty much means starting over for most people, which after endless PB, few have the stomach for. PB nearly finished my ringing career and I had to learn Camb6 (and now 8) unassisted on a tower sim - and it's going to be a challenge to get a chance to ring it "for real" on 8 — John de Overa

Quite a few things here:

1. There is a huge gap between PB and cambridge, I agree. I mentioned Cambridge and London as a link to the original post which was talking about the NW course trying to offer a more "advanced" learning environment. I guess my point that i didn't make was, maybe at some point before we get to ringing Cambridge, we stop regarding ourselves as a learner. But we shouldn't and everyone should continue to push (and pull) those that want to make additional progress.

2. I don't understand what is wrong with PB as a teaching method. It is not much more complicated than plain hunt. There are plenty of steps that can be taught between it and Cambridge, I agree. What would you suggest instead?

3. I am really interested to understand how you managed to learn and ring Cambridge on 6 and 8 without much help? I went from PB to Cambridge in one step and in a couple of weeks, but (1) I was 17, (2) I had a mentor that I could talk to almost daily, and (3) I had a capable band around me (I could literally see the space for me to ring in fairly easily). What do you mean by having to start over to ring proper methods?, and why will it be a challenge to ring cambridge major in a tower?

have you tried to arrange practices at the level you need or want? I would be surprised if some of the group of ringers that you mention would not be prepared to come out and ring changes at any level. Happy to be corrected.

It sounds like there are enough ringers in striking distance of you. Is it the organisation that is missing?

We don't have a problem getting enough ringers to "fill the ropes" for our monthly simulator practice, which tends to attract learners wanting plain doubles. We have recently started to offer a more advanced method to say 'thank you' to the more experienced ringers that are supporting the learners and this is working quite well.

As an aside, our simulator practice doesn't seem to attract people wanting to learn, say Cambridge or London surprise minor, or anything - at all - on eight. Despite the fact there are people that could benefit from that. We haven't worked out why yet... And it is partly why we have started offering the more advanced method to stretch some of our helpers a bit...

Thanks for everything you have done Simon, its clear that you have invested an enormous amount of time and energy, sometimes dealing with challenging subjects and often without much thanks. You deserve a well earned rest.

that is positive, well done!

How many towers could be using it?

There will always be lead adopter towers, could they be supported every week and develop into a beacon of what could be achieved?

I think a model like this could be valuable in lots of areas...

We are trying to drag the scheme into the 21st century, with an on-line signing up system, but we are aware that the personal touch will still be needed. It will all hinge on gaining and maintaining a sufficient pool of volunteers. The pool had got quite small, and it was time that something was done about that in any case. We are just about to start a pilot, and hope it will be fully operational in the spring. As I said, watch this space! — Richard Pargeter

How are you getting on?

Interesting. Two questions:

1. what are wheels made from?, and
2.Whilst I know ash is great, is there no other tree that has similar properties that would do the same job as ash?

Money is a really interesting subject. I do not think I am supportive of an upfront cost which makes it prohibitive for anyone to be able to start their ringing journey. But having said that... if we offered ringing as a night school for example (say £50 for ten lessons) along the same lines of college classes: an introduction to french, or drawing, or whatever it might be: would demand for our Art suddenly appear?, if the supply was created? has anyone actually tried this?

Looking at it in another way, if a very modest charge was implemented instead, so that a "culture" developed of giving little and often then could this achieve a similar amount of funds to the future of ringing? My tower has a considerable amount of funds available to it so in one sense there is no need to introduce a culture of regular small donations, but if we did, and half the average attendance gave £1 that could easily raise £300 a year. That would be equivalent to getting 3 new learners who had stumped up £100 up front and may or may not still be with us. (if everyone on the books gave a £1 donation a week we would easily be talking £1,000). Some of that money could then be diverted to local or central activities.

And then, the new recruits would enter into an environment where the small donations just happened, naturally. And would probably join in with it at an early stage, either immediately or after they had caught the bug. Its harder now, because we are getting much closer to a cashless society, but there must be ways around this I am sure. Would this be a better way of raising funds rather than trying to extract a fairly significant sum from a small pool of new learners that may or may not make it in the medium to long term? When I was learning to ring the standard eight (surprise major), I regularly attended a tower that didn't have its own band as such. But the ringing was of a very good standard. This tower had that culture where most people gave something most weeks. I'm talking 30 years ago but I would be surprised if they were not raising at least £5 a week back then... Much more could be raised now.

1. Be welcoming to all ringers regardless of their ability;
2. Give equal opportunity for band members to develop in their ringing;
3. Expect band members to take ownership of their own development;
4. Create a safe environment for asking questions;
5. If the first explanation doesn't work, try a different one;
6. Strive for the best striking that the band is capable of;
7. Push the band out of their comfort zone sometimes, but not all the time;
8. Share the teaching and calling opportunities with as many band members as possible;
9. Take all ringing sessions seriously, but have some fun too;
10. Never give up on anyone, but be honest and realistic with them as well.

Not sure national or even local press is our only avenue for recruitment though. It has a role but recruitment at a more grassroots level can work as well, and will avoid the sensationalist approach that the national press like.

The problem with a survey is that it is a snapshot at a particular point in time. By comparing it with a previous survey you can see that changes have taken place, or it provides a baseline for future surveys. — Roger Booth

Whilst I agree it is a snapshot, I think that is what we need at the moment. We know we are in decline. What we need to work out is what ringing sessions do we need to offer to tempt people out to develop their experience. The survey wont do that on its own, we probably then need to go back and speak with some respondents to understand what they will come out for.

and yet pretty much all of the £15 could be eligible for gift aid if it was given the BRF...at an extra 25%!! — Philip Pratt

are you saying we only claim gift aid on the BRF bit? Whilst that does encourage that strategy (i.e. stick as much in as you can to maximise the additional cash) it could lead to there being not enough money to do anything else with... And, lots of money in a bell fund just sitting there earning a bit of interest.

btw this is not a G&B discussion, interested in what other associations do :-)