Ringing Forums

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.

Amen to that, thank you Simon!

Yes, thanks Simon :smile:

From the blog post:

Seeding more regional ringing courses is in the strategy, but it was a bit concerning to learn that it was the entry level options on the NW course that were most over subscribed, the level that should be being catered for by local branches and associations. The course had tried to pitch itself a little higher up the learning curve.

Colour me utterly unsurprised.

Many associations in the NW seem to struggle to move people past CCs & PH. There's no widespread bedrock of help for the transition from that into methods, so the only option for many is to go on a course. But without ongoing support afterwards, that's pretty pointless. The advanced ringing that does take place is mostly in small, closed, increasingly elderly groups who want to only ring with people at their level and who aren't really interested in teaching.

The current generation are probably the end of method ringing here, other than a few isolated pockets. I think it's already too late to do anything about it, method ringers here have been sleepwalking towards oblivion for decades. If there is to be method ringing here in the future, it's going to mean starting over from scratch. And a once a year course won't cut it.

Ouch! That sounds very harsh and I’m surprised it could be so different in NW England to other areas. I ring in London and I know we are lucky that this is geographically easier, with good public transport making it easy to ring at multiple towers but still.
I do agree that an annual course but no chance to practice the methods regularly in between is of little help. Most Associations have some organised training to help and / or district practices which can also help. Maybe we need to do more to spread best practice on support for developing bands. The Ringing Course Value for Money thread shares one such example of regular support for tower bands who want to progress. But this definitely relies on experienced ringers being willing to invest time to help developing ringers and in most areas this seems to be normal and satisfying for many experienced ringers.

"harsh" might imply that it's not true, "direct" or "blunt" might be nearer to the mark :wink: The original observation was @Simon Linford's not mine - but from my experience he is spot on.

The only regular intermediate/advanced branch-style practice I'm aware of in the GM area has nothing to do with a branch, it's been organised by one individual. It seems to be primarily for people who can already ring at Surprise level, which I think is a measure of the scale of the problem - even people at that level are having to arrange special practices in order to get a ring.

Association level practices are mostly a wash, the closest towers to here are in 3 different associations and none of them are great - but from talking to people who were ringing here decades ago, it's never exactly been a hotbed of ringing.

I fully agree that you need "experienced ringers being willing to invest time to help developing ringers", but in my opinion there just isn't the critical mass here for that any longer - although I'd love someone to prove me wrong!

I hope this area is an outlier, but approaches based on the availability of sufficient experienced ringers to "bootstrap" things are I think probably unworkable here. The challenge is how to re-establish proper method ringing when to all practical intents, it's already died out.

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...

I've heard the "arrange a practice" suggestion before, and whilst on the surface it seems like a solution, it really isn't. It doesn't scale up for everyone who needs helping, and as I already noted, there's no longer a big enough pool of ringers in this area to draw on to start with. And even if there was, fixing my problem wouldn't fix the much larger problem.

Yes organisation is an issue, but from what I've been told that's been the case here since well before I started ringing. Once the number of experienced and willing ringers drops below a critical threshold, no amount of "organising" can dig you out of the hole. Trying what may have sort-of worked in the past over and over again in the hope it might fix the current crisis is futile, a radically different approach is needed.

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.

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?

"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.

I can ring touches of Cambridge, I still class myself as a learner.

People tend to learn PB by bell number, the same way they learn PH, so bobs & singles are a big challenge. The average fare of 2 plain courses of PB5 a week = 4 dodges = a glacial pace of learning, As I remember, I decided to teach myself Double Oxford on the tower sim (easy to remember, lots of dodging), Treble Bob Hunt, then Oxford TB. But I've seen much more thought-through suggestions than that - on the St Martin's Guild website, perhaps?

I don't want to focus on my case as the important discussion is the more general one and I'm not the future of ringing here as I'm too old. But as you asked, first I learned how to learn methods properly, not by rote - there are good books on this but it does require being prepared to learn some theory. Then I went from PB to Cambridge on our tower sim, not in one jump but via a number of other methods, and during COVID. I'm the wrong side of 60, there was no ringing taking place so no band.

As for Cambridge 8, the challenge is finding a band who can ring it and who will let me ring it with them - but I do have a plan :wink:

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.

"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...

↪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...