Ringing Forums

"It is being the one-learner surrounded by an experienced band that is so brilliant about these courses." Absolutely: no disrespect to my local band, but ringing with a band when I know that everyone else is going to be absolutely in the right place all the time means that I can just concentrate on place-counting, striking and fitting in.

The challenge in recruiting and teaching new ringers, including in group courses at later stages of learning, is that we ‘need’ one new ringer for every four current active ringers (if the Ring for the King stats are accurate) but less than one in four active ringers can teach handling or will give up additional time for teaching and helping in a structured session designed for the learner.
So those that do have to invest a significant amount of time in teaching and helping learners. This can easily lead to frustration or burnout for the originally willing volunteer. Trying to offer the best possible experience to every recruit and enjoy your own ringing opportunities is time consuming or means something loses out.
I do think it helps new learners to be part of the community of the ringing practice and that most who attend a training course (whether half a day locally or a longer course) enjoy the experience and feel that they have benefited but I also think this is part of how we teach because volunteers don’t have time to offer one to one (let alone a band built to support a learner for constant plain hunt or whatever) for every learner for all of their rope time.
I would like to see more ringers recognise that they can give back for the support they have received (often still receive) by helping others in a wide range of ways from a relatively early stage in their own learning. If we could make it obvious for everyone that bellringing requires teamwork all the way through we could spread the work wider and we might then find it easier to offer better quality teaching to more of our new recruits and re-build, still as a volunteer led organisation.

"It is incumbent on all those who have reached a certain ceiling to send the elevator back down and give others a helpful lift"

Yes, in principle I agree but in practice I see it to a certain extent within a tower band and from selected people within a district or association but there are many, many ringers who only ring for the ringing which suits them (perhaps at different stages in their ringing career they have more and less time available) and reaching the point where we need 25% more bellringers (as a target) is a very big ask for the 25% (ish, pure guesstimate) who will put in the extra work to try and achieve this.

and what that leads to is very inefficient 'sending of the elevator back down'. In a perfect world you would only send the elevator down say 10 floors, but what actually happens is you get extremely experienced ringers teaching bell handling rather than helping at the surprise major practice. No one grumbles about it, but it would be better if everyone just did a bit of helping of the tier below them.

it would be better if everyone just did a bit of helping of the tier below them — Simon Linford

Yes, and to stretch the analogy, in many cases the issue is not the length of the elevator shaft, it's that the elevator is completely broken and you are faced with a long climb up a dank and dimly lit staircase. Faced with that, many just quickly give up on the climb.

Simon's comment about "experienced ringers teaching bell handling rather than helping at the surprise major practice" is correct. Many of those "star" ringers, unfortunately, do not have a clue on how to teach handling to new recruits. They would provide a better service working with ringers on learning difficult methods and on conducting. Leave the handling training to those who know how to do it.

Many of those "star" ringers, unfortunately, do not have a clue on how to teach handling to new recruits. They would provide a better service working with ringers on learning difficult methods and on conducting. Leave the handling training to those who know how to do it. — Eileen Butler

I've seen this come up many times. Yes, some ace ringers can teach handling and even more of them are excellent at helping you once you've got to a level where you can understand and act on what they are telling you. But for teaching basic handling they can be a bit of a disaster. That's not through lack of willingness, it's often that they learned so long ago they can't remember how they did, or what it's like to be connected to several 100Kgs of spinning metal for the first time. Having them teach handling makes about as much sense as having a Premier League coach teach primary kids, the result is very often frustration on both sides.

Plus some of them can have rather "unique" handling styles that are probably best not passed on... :joke:

Teaching bell handling to another is quite different to ringing methods yourself. Competence in one does not assure competence in the other - but there is often a very large overlap because to be a good teacher of bell handling you need your own bell handling to be very good, which typically comes from having progressed to being a good change ringer.

To become a competent teacher of bell-handling requires an interest in the challenges (and rewards) that this aspect of ringing brings and the application of thought and practice in the matter of teaching bell handling. Quite a few very experienced ("star") ringers know this aspect of ringing does not interest them or that they are not temperamentally suited to the task - and quite openly acknowledge that they would be a very poor teacher of bell handling (so they don't do it).

To me the challenge for ringing is getting those who have developed good ringing skills and have a suitable temperament to take an interest in teaching bell handling. But so far I have found it difficult to achieve this - partly due to the sporadic availability of learners (in a country church), but also because of a reticence to take on the job when there is someone else with more experience available (despite encouragment to do so - with the experienced teacher acting as a mentor). As Simon said, there is a need for more good people to step forward and help carry the load.

I can understand some of the concerns that a novice teacher has - taking responsibility for somebody else's safety and having the self-confidence that you will be able to deal with any problems that arise. These are things that can be addressed through the thought and practice aspects of becoming a teacher, in particular I think the practice aspect could be better addressed by novice teachers spending more time with a mentor (in lieu of a learner) to explore different issues that can arise and how to deal with them. Courses such as ART can be a good starting point - but skills need to be honed through regular application.

For 18 years before lockdown, the Cambridge District of the EDA had a practice night support scheme, organised and run by Geoff Perryman. (The supporters rapidly became affectionately known as 'Perry People'). This was aimed at providing that extra one or two ringers that are so often needed on a practice night to achieve what the band are trying to learn. In one tower, it might be progression to surprise, but in another it may be just a steady enough band for call changes, allowing a spare to stand behind. This gave a lot of scope for 'ordinary' ringers to "help others in a wide range of ways from a relatively early stage in their own learning" (as Lucy says). We are about to re-launch this scheme. Watch this space!

I would also say that the scheme has many other benefits. Ringers at a fairly early stage in their careers will often find it valuable to them to go out and get some more rope time, operating well within their comfort zone, and they may be offered the opportunity to do things that they aren't offered in their own tower, like calling changes. It also results in integration between towers. Once the ringers in a supported tower discover that there are some friendly ringers out there, they will be more likely to go to other practices, and district and association events.

It is a really good idea and hits a really common need. To have kept it going to 18 years is exceptional. Did all the burden of organisation fall on Geoff or did it start to be more sustainable? We tried it in the St Martin's Guild but it dried up.

, it was all Geoff, and he does indeed deserve praise and recognition for that.

He had a rule of only asking people to commit to once per month, which probably helped keep people on side. Also, he would phone and ask people personally on each occasion - which was not easy to refuse if you didn't actually have a prior engagement. If you did he would immediately offer you an alternative! From the other side of the fence, he would listen to feedback from the volunteers (an advantage of doing everything by phone), and if there were issues, he would take them up with the tower captains concerned. We were in no doubt that we should not impose unduly, or take our helpers for granted.

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!

...trying to drag the scheme into the 21st century, with an on-line signing up system — Richard Pargeter

Yes, if we did this, just for our local band, we would have an idea, say by lunchtime of practice-night, of what we might be able to ring in the evening.

Then we could offer a chance to ring PB5/Stedman7/BristolSM/... to one of the local ringers who had previously registered their interest, with the assurance of a competent stander-behind.

Similarly we could ask other local ringers who has previously registered their willingness to help, to extend our repertoire to ... if they were able to join us that evening.

That might all help with the issue that started the thread, how best to have value from the time and effort invested in ringing training.

It would need us all to make commitments-to-attend which are as firm as they are to ring for a wedding, or a Quarter or a Peal ...

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?

Thanks for asking.

We have been running now for six months. There are 48 ringers registered, although a few are not really active participants. Where it has been used, it has been successful - lifting a R&C / plain hunt practice to PB and Stedman for example. Of the two towers which are using it regularly one is at that level, and the other just needing support to ring R&C / plain hunt steadily, but one (8 bell tower) also requested ringers for a few practices to help them ring Kent.

Out of the 48 registered, 16 have helped at least once. I think this would be more if there were more towers using it. People are unlikely to support practices which are at the other end of the district, or on their own practice night.

Overall, the scheme has been well received, and works well, but we do need to increase uptake by practice nights.

Unfortunately you can’t see how it works properly without registering, but if you go to https://autoperry.cambridgeringing.info you can at least see the help pages, which include information on the source code, for those who understand that. If anyone is serious about seeing more, please let me know at pnsoatcambridgeringingdotinfo.

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...

Two of my new ringers attended the recent NW course. Both were working at the same level but they were split into different groups with different tutors. One has returned with renewed confidence and a sense of achievement. The other is disappointed and somewhat unsettled. Both tutors required an acceptable standard of bell handling and striking. One was willing to compromise somewhat in order that the pupils could make progress with PH and PB. The other appears to have insisted in perfection before moving to the next stage.

Whilst it is absolutely right that handling and striking must meet a standard, it is surely expecting too much to ask for the level of perfection that comes with experience from a group of new ringers who are taking their first steps into change-ringing.

My purely personal feedback as a tutor at the recent NW course was...
a) full marks to all the "students" in the Starting Surprise topic, who had actually done all the homework that was set (!) and so were able to make full use of the rope time; all made really great progress.
b) I agree that some "just one student at a time" is needed, but it really does cut down on each student's ringing time. It also results in what some residential courses complain about - the same students coming back and doing the same thing year after year (as they can ring whatever it is ONLY when surrounded by good ringers ( i.e. the helpers). So I feel that not TOO much "one student only" is worth aiming for.
c) I was very impressed with the optional extra 'Handling Clinic' sessions. Much more progress made in a short session than typically happens in towers. Not sure why - maybe the different mindset ("seize the opportunity") of those attending?
d) Value for money? Well, everything is done to keep the cost as low as possible, but residential courses with meals provided are going to cost a fair bit whatever happens. Feedback suggests a very high level of overall satisfaction (but not of course 100%).

While there can be a balance between rope time for the students and having as steady a band as possible for the students, and the best mix will depend on the students and helpers and topic, I think it is usually going to be more beneficial to the student (who are after all paying the most), if the balance is towards "one at a time". As you noted, they can practice with less good bands at almost any practice in the country!

they can practice with less good bands at almost any practice in the country! — Iain D Scott

Not for a lot of methods, certainly Surprise, even Minor, and there are lots of towers where you couldn't run Plain Bob Minor.
However, if the subject being learned is towards the advanced end, the students ought to be competent ringers, I'd reliable on things below the method being learned, so it should be possible to get more rope time even with 'one at a time' for the chosen method, eg covering to Stedman or Treble to Surprise.
Also in my experience on more advanced courses some of the students will be steady enough to allow two at a time for some touches.

I was very impressed with the optional extra 'Handling Clinic' sessions — David Smith

We ran them as evening options years ago. Of the students I had, some responded well but a few had such engrained problems it was difficult to undo in an hour or two.

I agree that some "just one student at a time" is needed, but it really does cut down on each student's ringing time. It also results in what some residential courses complain about - the same students coming back and doing the same thing year after year (as they can ring whatever it is ONLY when surrounded by good ringers — David Smith

It was also my experience as a group leader on the Surrey Association training days in the 1990's and 2000's. These were held twice a year, and the same strudents came back time after time. They didn't get the support in their local towers, and reverted to their bad habits. We did hold tower captain's training days, but few tower captains attended.

At Alresford we have ten new 'Ring to the King' ringers at the moment, who are all very keen, and just starting to pain hunt. This requires a far geater degree of bell control, and other skills, than are needed to ring call-changes. If we had tried the traditional approach of 'one in at a time' to plain hunt, it would be very slow, the new ringers would only have got a couple of goes each evening, and our experienced ringers would have become very bored too!

Therefore we have used all the exercises in the Learning the Ropes foundation skills toolbox (whole pull and stand, set after a variable number of strokes, kaleidoscope places and dodges, mexican wave, switch-a-roo, moving anticlockwise round the circle to ring all the bells in the tower, ring facing out the circle etc.) We don't need very many helpers to do this and the students get a lot of rope time, so they are making rapid progress. They also enjoy doing all these exercises.

If only we could spread the word and get more towers, Guild and Association trainiing days (and residential couses) to do the same!

It also results in what some residential courses complain about - the same students coming back and doing the same thing year after year (as they can ring whatever it is ONLY when surrounded by good ringers ( i.e. the helpers). — David Smith

I don't doubt that's true but the more important questions is why? From watching @Simon Linford's Ringing 2030 presentation, his estimate is that branches may now only have around 20 Surprise Level ringers, although obviously the levels before that will have more ringers. It's very difficult to learn to ring methods unless you are surrounded by a good band, and it takes quite a bit of practice beyond that before you can do it with others who are wobbly. Courses are probably the only opportunity some people have to ring with good ringers, but once a year is never going to be enough for them to learn to ring them. That's a grass-roots problem that no number of residential courses is ever going to solve.

Two of my new ringers attended the recent NW course. Both were working at the same level but they were split into different groups with different tutors .... — Peter Sotheran

which is good, because one benefit of the course is to ring with new people...

...One has returned with renewed confidence and a sense of achievement. ...

which is also good,

...The other is disappointed and somewhat unsettled. ...

... which is a pity. After the course, there's an opportunity to provide feedback to the organisers, and it would be useful to debate what they wrote, if they care to share their thoughts with us here. Even better is to use the opportunities for feedback during the couse. For example, there was a hour on each of the four days, in a large meeting room together, for all the students and tutors on the Learn It, Ring It topic to informally exchange ideas, compare progress and to prepare for the forthcoming practical sessions.

...Both tutors required an acceptable standard of bell handling and striking....

which is also good, and one of the aims of the course. The course emphasis was basic skills, rather than specifically 'Plain Hunt' or 'Plain Bob' in order to tailor the sessions to the needs of each student individually.

...One [tutor] was willing to compromise somewhat in order that the pupils could make progress with PH and PB. The other appears to have insisted in perfection before moving to the next stage.

Well, I don't think we ought to turn perfection into a perjorative term, but neither of us was there to view the interactions and the progress over the four days.

A few thoughts, then:
Having attended weekend courses for thirty years as tutor or helper, students' expectations of achieving, say, a touch of PBDoubles inside, is affected by all manner of variables - the long draft, unfamiliar weight of bells, lengths of rope, size of circle, lighting, being young and having blasted ahead to achieve this at home between course application and the course weekend, ... Hence the less-specific course-topic title Learn It, Ring It allows tutors and students to review together all progress and challenges, and finish the course concentrating on the individual positive outcomes.

One of our Learn It, Ring It students was doing well in rounds on a long draft with an excellent long straight pull. The hand-transfer looked good: while the hand was in the correct position it was not gripping the rope until well-after the hand was above head-high on the tensioned backstroke, so there was no chance of adjusting the rope-length for a change of hunting-speed, such as a dodge. We suggested working on this when ringing-easily and without pressure, and that they would find it a worthwhile investment of concentration. Hopefully this was a useful outcome for this student, even without having listed it before the course, or to have achieved this completely during the weekend