Ringing Forums

But it is something I came acros often - learner struggles with something and no attempt is made to find out WHAT they are finding difficukt or WHY they are going wrong. — Sue Marsden

I am fortunate to be retired. Therefore I have time to give extra practises to my ringers. The issue in the case cited seems to be that the learner hasn't been taught how to dodge, or, more importantly, the difference between an up and a down dodge. This is one of the elements which I teach during our extra practices, and is more easily done at 'tied bell' practices because continuous practice can be done, and often in a group environment with other similarly experienced learners. It is the teacher's responsibility to make sure that the learner understands the various elements of ringing. Same as a school teacher needs to make sure they get the message across! Feedback is always important. Are we taking too much for granted? Are our expectations for some of our learners too high? Are our expectations for some our teachers too high? (Teachers of ringing are not necessarilly "teachers")

I am fortunate to be retired. Therefore I have time to give extra practises to my ringers. — Phillip George

I'm not so fortunate but I still run weekly tied bell + simulator practices. The difference it has made is significant. I think if you are serious about bringing people on, extra practices are vital. Nobody is going to learn to dodge properly with the standard 2 attempts at 2 leads of PBD a week.

it's worth looking at The Road to Ringiing, reviewed in last week's RW. They are based on Linda's own teaching practice, developed over a number of years.

I have the full set and Linda was waving the RW at me about an hour ago, although I didn't have a chance to read the review as we were all about to leave for the next tower :smile:

Ok, I have only skimmed the above but

Yours making an assumption, that we stop “teaching people”, by which I’m defining as developing there skills and offering learnings.

I learned to ring in 2001 (ish), I would like to ring I have wisdom imparted to me weekly by Manchester Cathedrals ringing master and I’ve just attended the NW Course (again).

I think part of the teaching model is a separation between learning and doing, which in my professional opinion as a software developer and coach is flawed.
We shouldn’t stop learning, and therefore being taught, we should simply transition to a different style of learning which is continuous and peer driven.

Perhaps the expectation being given to people is you learn to ring, then you ring, rather than a lifelong pursuit of development of a skill.
Personally I try to talk to my learners about continuous improvement.

I agree about the need for a continuum from initial learning through coached development to self driven / peer supported development. That lifelong perspective was the guiding philosophy whe we wrote The New Ringer's Book, and it's something I try to impart to everyone I come into contact with.
But I think that's a bit tangential to the thrust of Linda's book, which is that the early stages of learning can lay the ground for developing change ringing, and that if they aren't, as is often dine, later progression to competent change ringing is made difficult if not impossible.

I think you are both right. Of course some people get to a level and don't want to progress any further, but I don't think anyone starts with a goal of being distinctly mediocre.

Obviously there's a point in people's progress where they need to do the equivalent of moving from college to university and take primary responsibility for their progress. The challenge is supporting that - in many cases the ringing equivalent is a bit like pointing them at the university library and telling them to come back in three years for an exam. And if that's coupled with John's point about lack of groundwork, it's no wonder so many people get stuck between PH and "proper" methods.

I spent a half an hour yesterday quizzing a very experienced ringer about his "mental model", rather than the mechanics. It was invaluable - some things I'd already figured out myself and it was good to hear I wasn't too far off the mark, other things I hadn't thought of but clicked as soon as he said them. To go back to the university analogy, it was like attending a tutorial. I know the importance of the pub to ringing is often joked about, it can fill the same role but it's very hit and miss.

One thing that stood out in particular is he said that introspection was key to sustained progress. That comes across very strongly from the people who post here - it seems to me that they spend at least as much time thinking about ringing as they spend doing it. I think imbuing learners with that mindset from the start is important.

I don't think anyone starts with a goal of being distinctly mediocre — John de Overa

I'm sure they don't. They might start with an ambition only to do modest things but I doubt that thought that they would never fully master them would not enter their minds - a bit like the difference between aiming to climb a small hill so you can stand on the top and admire the view having expended modest effort but finding yourself part way up a scree slope where it's a continual effort.

the people who post here - it seems to me that they spend at least as much time thinking about ringing as they spend doing it — John de Overa

We are a very biased sample. It's hardly surprising that a discussion list attracts people who think about things, and the subset who make comments have clearly thought about them enough to form a view they feel worth passing on.
Also bear in mind the relatively high entry bar to these discussions - first you have to make the effort to subscribe to the forum and then you have to be interested enough to check it periodically. Compare that with the email lists where once you have subscribed everything gets delivered to you, whether or not you have already commented on the topic, and the even lower bar of the Facebook groups where stuff gets fed to you without the need to express any interest.

I like the scree analogy, it sounds familiar :grin:

I realise this is a biased sample but that's really the point - those people have a lot to offer, not just in their direct interactions with pupils but also in helping others do the same.

Nobody is going to learn to dodge properly with the standard 2 attempts at 2 leads of PBD a week. — John de Overa

Have you tried Bayles? (See https://ringingteachers.org/application/files/8916/1427/3217/Bayles_Bob_Doubles.pdf , although I tend to ring it ‘stand alone’ rather than spliced with PB, as both our 3rd and 4th are manageable for learners at that stage.)
Not an imposition on a practice night, and allows individual pieces of work to be practiced on their own. It is important in my view for dodges to be practiced with plain hunt each side of them. Repeated dodges just don’t have the same rhythm, or required physical actions.

I think the stalling relates to a few things:
1 motivation - why do people ring
2 ambition - do people see the opportunity to progress
3 confidence - do those who are stalling have the confidence to push to the next level
4 opportunity - is there an opportunity to progress

I’m currently stuck somewhere around ringing stedman triples and Cambridge minor.

Can I push to the next level, probably… do I get the opportunity, rarely!

In my branch, I’ve ringers suffering from 1-4, I’ve helped to breakdown 4 as much as I can for them, and they’re struggling with 1, 2, 3

But a number of our ringers more ring for a social purpose, than a ringing one

I think the answer to the question "Do we stop teaching people too soon?" is yes. For many learners once they have mastered Pbd progress is seen as learning new methods. Learning (acquiring new knowledge) and developing a skill are different things. Skills are developed by practice and feedback (internal or external). Ringing is a peculiar skill because you generally do it with other people so the feedback has to take in consideration of others' errors as well.

A fortunate few may be able to go and ring with much better ringers so they can guess that the errors are down to them but for most they will be ringing with other improvers and there will be leading mistakes, different row length/speed inconsistency, poor covering etc etc. In this scenario feedback and improvement is very difficult.

The question is then can we do anything about it? I think the answer is yes if we start talking about it, the comments above mimic many in talking about unambitious bands, poor culture etc none recognise for many actually a very difficult task and not surprisingly they give up on it.

Speaking of feedback, as you get on it tends to get both less frequent and sometimes more negative. I think that may be because more experienced ringers feel it isn't any longer their place to give it unless you've really stuffed something up. I still find feedback very useful and welcome it, when you are out of your comfort zone it's easy to miss issues that you'd normally pick up yourself.

When you start ringing longer touches, feedback is most helpful during the touch when you can immediately do something about it. And positive feedback is important as well, not for ego massaging but so you can focus on when you've made an improvement and keep doing it like that.

Its all in the quality of teaching, and ownership. I think that all learners should have a mentor who can help guide the ringer on to the next stage. I encourage my ringers to visit other towers but continue to mentor and advise them.
Example: our 9 yr old visited a tower last week off his own back (with parents) and struggled with the treble. He was told that the bell was too light for him. When he reported this to me I immediately told him that the bell was not too light, he was not ringing it correctly. I then explained the technique for ringing light bells, which he took on board.
The person who told him this was incorrect, and this type of comment doesn't help learners. Instead it encourages them to be shy of light bells (in this case) whereas in this case he should have been told by the person in charge how to manage the bell. Hence the need for learners to have hands on mentors to continue to help. But we can't be with them all the time, so we rely on other teachers being up to the task!
Another thing I find from teachers/tower captains is the habit of allowing a ringer to try the bell. Answer - No! You are going to ring it anyay and the first time you ring it will be in Rounds. This is another example where teachers are not confident enough to teach their learners to have confidence.

Another thing I find from teachers/tower captains is the habit of allowing a ringer to try the bell. Answer - No! — Phillip George

Sorry, I think that's a very unhelpful approach and shows a lack of understanding of just how nerve racking it can be for a learner to ring in an unfamiliar tower and/or with unfamiliar ringers. It doesn't matter how confident the teacher is, because it's not about them, it's about the learner. If a teacher can't appreciate the difference in between ringing on your own and ringing in rounds, I have to wonder if they should be teaching at all. A quick go takes less than a minute and as the person who'd have to end up fixing the stay, I'd much prefer than nervous learners had a try on their own. There's too much macho bulls**t in ringing as it is, this sort of mindset really needs to be consigned to the past.

He was told that the bell was too light for him. When he reported this to me I immediately told him that the bell was not too light, he was not ringing it correctly — Phillip George

I agree he should have been told that ringing light bells isn't easy, that it requires a specific technique, and how to do it. Ideally he would have had another go with someone standing with him to give advice. However, we don't know the overall context, who was present, the overall needs of them practice, and so on. If he was too far out of his comfort zone and unlikely to succeed on that bell on that occasion even with advice then it was reasonable to say the bell was too light for him 'for now' since he needed a bit more practice to be able to ring it.

I agree that I will always let someone have a go on their own to feel more settled before ringing in rounds if they are new to the bell. I think it’s easier for someone to find their ideal level of pull, place to catch, etc when ringing alone, without the worry of fitting in with overall timing.

exactly. I wouldn't necessarily be prompting them to do it, but if they were clearly hesitant and wanted to, fine. It's not uncommon for experienced ringers to have a couple of practice pulls to determine if they need a box or not, if that isn't a problem, this shouldn't be either.

If you want to instil confidence in beginners, I think one of the best ways is to teach them how to safely self-recover if they miss the sally, which at some point they will.

As a ringer of 7 years achieving a very modest ringing standard (I am old ish ) and a teacher by trade, I definitely know how I could improve. I have a great deal of frustration when, despite the dedicated tower captains, the opportunity for practice with experienced ringers is limited. I am mainly ringing with people around my own ability and feel there is a wish to discover a talented ringer, which I am not. I strongly agree with the last comment regarding loosing control of the bell. I lived in fear for a long time because when it happened to me someone rushed over in what appeared to be a panic to grab the rope. A confident ringer I am never going to be and I think this is closely linked to age. But I know now that it is essential, to make good progress, the skills to retrieve control are given early on so that ringing doesnt feel so dangerous.

It can certainly be hard to develop as a ringer without a stable environment in which to practice. It's not clear in this case whether it's method ringing or just good striking that is the goal, but for someone not to feel safe after ringing 7 years (I assume ringing familiar, normal bells) suggests something is wrong.
The ability to handle a bell safely is the core skill on which everything else builds. If you don't feel confident that you can safely handle whatever the bell does then that distraction will undermine everything else you try to do.
As a teacher I see helping the learner to feel at ease with the bell, and to develop the confidence that goes with it, as an integral part of initial teaching - an essential stage on the learner's progression to 'flying solo'.

I was very impressed with an article in the Ringing World a few months ago about Barnes and how all learners at Barnes are quickly taught how to help an early stage learner with handling practice, so that the fear is removed and the control is learnt very early on.
Teaching a learner while people wince in the background is no help to anyone so I agree, understanding what is happening so you can be rescued calmly (if needed) and better still advised before a rescue is needed on how to adjust, enables the ringer to think about striking, etc rather than worrying about why the bell sometimes behaves unexpectedly.
Whilst some people might be talent spotting many are looking for reliable ringers who support their local tower regularly and ensure that the bells are rung ‘nicely’ for the audience outside. Progression will is not easy if the band is largely at a similar stage of experience and ability so make use of any branch or district support available but don’t lose heart, progress will still come.

My comments re bell handling refer to my initial experience. I have not had a fear of handling for several years now and our current teachers have rectified it with beginners. But I wanted to emphasise how important an awareness of that is in agreement with the previous comments. Compared to how I feel now I realise it would have been much more enjoyable and successful without having that initial fear of losing control.
Regarding general confidence I think it's an age thing because at my age newly learned things don't stick. Therefore something as complex as ringing, without a lot of repetition, is difficult. The situation with the availability of rope time with good ringers in my opinion is the chief problem for beginners, but not a criticism. At every level everyone wants to progress and depend upon ringers ahead of them in ability. I wish there were more intensive courses. But very grateful for the dedicated teachers I have.

I lived in fear for a long time because when it happened to me someone rushed over in what appeared to be a panic to grab the rope. — Judith Dennis

It's difficult to simulate losing control, you can't really recreate the "startle factor" when it happens for real. I illustrate that you can miss the sally, just ring backstrokes and still have control of the bell. We also go through the drill which is:

• If you miss the sally, don't make a second attempt to grab it, it's most likely already going up to the ceiling and if you grab hold, so are you.
• Keep hold of the tail end with both hands.
• Go up the rope a bit, step back if you need to and go into "ringing up" mode, something they practice from the first lesson.

The other key thing is for the teacher not to panic themselves, seeing them dashing across the room, madly grabbing at the rope and ending up half way up to the ceiling themselves is the opposite of confidence giving - I saw exactly that last week. For me, taking the rope off the learner is a last resort, not the first response to a fluffed stroke.

Therefore something as complex as ringing, without a lot of repetition, is difficult. The situation with the availability of rope time with good ringers in my opinion is the chief problem for beginners, but not a criticism. — Judith Dennis

Sufficient, appropriate rope time is a problem no matter what level you are at. My experience is that rope time is the biggest single factor in people's progress, far more so than age, for example.

Thank you for your advice. As a relatively new ringer I'm always amazed at how generous everyone is of their time. However it doesn't prevent the frustrations associated with learning to ring, as for me it had been very slow.

@Sue Marsden
It's exactly this frustration that made me invent a Training Officer post in our branch, and fill it with myself. That way I have a legitimate reason to pursue all learners in the branch and offer them bespoke, targetted practices where we try to understand their issues and give them the right type of help.

Most of the practices have been at the lower end, up to pb5, g5, but we have done treble bobbing and on request we have had one royal/triples, and a few times a year it's been Core7 (including people who are just beginning Y and C8).

Of course I have to organise the practices, which is quite a lot of work and not easy when you are a procrastinator like me. I've booked in advance 4 towers every other month, so that's 2 practices a month to sort out. Mostly Saturday mornings. I try to get really good helpers but sometimes there aren't enough available, and standards have to slip a bit - you just have to work with what you've got.

Because I ask for people all across the branch, it does have the added benefit of getting ringers from different towers to meet and get to know each other. I know some of them have been inspired to take exercises back with them to try out at their tower as well. It's also an opportunity to encourage different people to try leading a practice. We get good feedback from learners.

It's not enough of course, it's never enough! Ideally there'd be something every week at a central, dedicated training tower, with high grade helpers and properly ART trained leads.

I'd love it if there was something like that round here, well done!