Ringing Forums

as someone much lower down in the pyramid, I think your assessment of the current situation is accurate, particularly when it comes to the need for continuing development and the issues around associations.

I think the median ringer has probably been ringing CCs for a long time already, the question is if they have a desire to progress beyond that? And what proportion of ringers actually aspire to ringing peals, or is it of interest only to a small but highly visible section of the ringing community?

Perhaps something to explore in the questionnaire?

it would be good to contact each individual ringer. But we don't have any obvious workable system for that — A J Barnfield

I think it would need help from the associations - as a rank & file ringer I get regular emails from three I ring in, but admittedly that route is only going to reach those of us that are members. The Facebook ringing groups are another route to individuals - both the "regular" ones, the association specific ones and the ones where the learners hang out. As you say it's going to be difficult to get a truly random sample, but perfect is the enemy of good, as they say :smile:

TCs would be more than sufficient — Tristan Lockheart

I think that entirely depends on what you want to find out. There's inevitably going to be a degree of bias from TCs. No TC is going to say "I have no clue how to run things, my ringers are pissed off, many are going to quit and my tower is on its last legs".

The CCCBR's strategic priorities are couched in terms of the needs and aspirations of individual ringers, which I think is right. If you want to find out what individual ringers think then you need to ask them. That should be possible for a reasonable subset via existing association contact mechanisms - email, Facebook etc, but I realise that's not easy. However a workplace employee survey that only asked managers how things are going would be unlikely to accurately reflect the views of employees.

Are we all that scary hereabouts — PeterScott

Sure are :grimace: :scream: :fear:

It's for purely hysterical raisins - I needed an alternate soshul meejah account when we did the publicity for our rehang, then it got traction locally so I kept it going, then when I registered on here I reused it so people wouldn't get confused. No big deal.

I would like to assist! — Nick Lawrence

Thank you - I did reply to your PM, it should be in your inbox. I've provided more detail there.

Take a look at this map from Dove, showing the locations of simulators. Some pretty major gaps, even in the major metropolises where they could have a large customer base. — Tristan Lockheart

I'd be a little cautious about reading too much into that map - I know of at least 3 towers in the Greater Manchester area that have simulators and aren't on the map.

Getting towers to respond is enough of a task in itself ... it needs to be strongly supported by local officials or 'big names' — Tristan Lockheart

I think it's worth pointing out that towers can be "off the grid", for decades nobody at my home tower was in the association so we were unreachable. Even now there are only 3 of us. Without including those sorts of towers, any survey is going to be misleading - and sorry, no I don't know how you solve that problem! :grin:

the three broad attitudes I have experienced are... — Tristan Lockheart

I think your three categories are pretty accurate - at one of the towers I ring at a QP is a non-event, if only 6 turn up we'll probably ring a QP and clear off to the pub early, so it's a 1. For my home tower, as far as we can make out, it is 40+ years since the tower band could ring methods, and there are no QPs in bellboard by the tower band, so it's a 3. And I've rung in another tower in the area where it's a 2.

You have to be in the right area and in with the right crowd to get into QPs and peals... — Tristan Lockheart

I think that's right, and I've heard exact same comment from people at surprise major level in this area, so I think it's probably a mostly geographical issue.

lack of quarter peal opportunities as a barrier to completing the higher (4 and 5) levels of ART — Simon Linford

That's right, but it is a deeper issue than just getting a band together for a QP. At my level the first time you ring a QP of a new method is a challenge, one that you need regular practice for. That requires more from helpers than an one-off commitment to turn up for a QP. I've had kind people offer to arrange QPs for me, but unless I'm at the point where there's a reasonable chance of me getting through it, I really don't feel it would be right to take up the offer.

Interestingly, Surprise Minor/Major practices have popped up in two of the associations I ring in, but, as far as I can tell, although they have been advertised by the associations, neither of them have been arranged by them. It remains to be seen if they can be sustained, there's just about enough people at one of them to make it viable. It's also worth noting that without endless clanking away on our tower sim on my own during COVID I would still be at the PBD level, unable to take advantage of either of those opportunities, and there's not much in the area to bridge that gap.

Is the Median Ringer's No Peals in any way surprising? — PeterScott

Speaking as a Median Ringer, I would be astonished if that wasn't the case.

I have admiration for the skill, focus and dedication of those who ring peals. Having talked to peal ringers I understand the attraction for those who ring them, but personally I have no interest in ever ringing one. And I suspect that's the Median view.

people from our tower have recently started going to the monthly plain methods sessions at the Derbyshire one, but from looking at their calendar, the main users seem to be the resident band.

We will need to take care not to exclude people from learning because they can't afford it. We would not want to end up spending large amounts of time teaching people who have lots of spare cash but making little progress while not teaching those with exceptional potential who don't, would we? — A J Barnfield

Yes, but there are ways around that - as I understand it, some associations offered support for the recent NW Ringing course in the form of bursaries. One youth arts project I'm aware of requires that people apply and selection is based on potential. If applicants are accepted then the majority of the costs, which include a residential element, are covered.

Some background info on costing of volunteer time, taken from the Heritage Lottery website, which we followed for our bid:

We use a standard rate to calculate the value of your volunteer time:

• professional volunteer (for example, accountancy or teaching): £50 per hour
• skilled volunteer (for example, leading a guided walk): £20 per hour
• volunteer (for example, administrative work): £10 per hour

When we went to their funding workshop they also made it very clear that they were in the business of supporting people working in the heritage sector, not keeping them in penury. Any costings for non-volunteer services had to be realistic, and if they weren't the bid would be rejected.

I also came across a salary guidance document from the organisation representing professional archivists, the recommendation for a director level role was ~£60k p.a.

There is some more detailed and interesting information on the Arts Marketing Association website, the salary for a director level role was £40k+ and for CEO £50k+, although salaries tend to vary widely based on the size of the organisation.

I'm sure there are lots of other similar documents, these were just the first ones I found, but they suggest that the "going rate" for a paid head of the CCCBR would be in the £50k - £60k p.a. range.

to access PealBase, you must have rung at least one peal. — Nick Lawrence

I haven't rung any at all and I have access...

:rofl:

Is there an amount that's large enough? It's a labour of love, surely? :wink: :lol:

And providing paid for lessons, using simulators, as well. An interesting model, one to watch for sure.

http://bellsofstclements.scy.org.uk/index.php/learn-to-ring/learning-at-st-clements

and I was exactly the same, but this isn't about you or me, it's about why:

Many ringers are only interested in ringing at their own towers and do not want to progress, let alone improve. — Sue Marsden

I think it's unlikely that anyone takes up ringing with the aim of becoming a poor ringer and resolutely staying that way, yet the consensus seems to be that's a significant problem. Why is that happening? I'm sure there's neither a simple answer or a simple solution, but clearly it's something that needs fixing, and urgently.

Indeed it is, and what I said is more complex than "experienced ringers and societies are all bad".

you mean a session where people can each ring with a simulator — John Harrison

Yes, but not exclusively. I've also been to quite a number of half/full day training sessions where the simulator is used for sound control, and there's homework in advance.

I question the assumption that the organisation won't change but the members would if given the chance. That doesn't fit our experience. — John Harrison

Your experience doesn't match what I see in the four different associations that I ring in. I accept that the picture is not the same everywhere, but I don't think we should downplay the seriousness of the problems ringing faces in some areas just because it's not universal.

Agreed it's difficult to reach towers that have been in stasis for many years, but if we can't engage with and motivate existing ringers, what makes us believe we'll be successful with non ringers? And more to the point, why did those towers end up that way in the first place?

This discussion seems to be going down the path of blaming everything on a nonexistent caricature of ringing. — John Harrison

Or it could be going down the path of people in areas where things are relatively OK not really understanding how bad they are in some other areas?