What questions should be included in a survey about ringing? 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". — John de Overa
We will have to consider this very carefully. It may need a separate section where it clearly indicated that tower-level information will not be seen by anyone else other than the survey team, and such information will only be presented on a district level.
I am inclined to agree with John that it would be good to contact each individual ringer. But we don't have any obvious workable system for that. Random sampling would be a possibility but obtaining a random sample, free of bias, would, I think, be difficult. — A J Barnfield
I can't see a way to do it. There is no data for us to create a stratified sampling method, and engaging with those individuals selected as part of the sample would be so difficult as to create sampling bias.
I also agree that the range of questions and those surveyed needs to be much narrower in scope than the 1988 survey. — A J Barnfield
Without having sight of the survey report (which I suggest is required for this project to progress), I would not be able to comment on whether it should be narrower. But certainly we will need to balance the aid of completion with the reality that this will be the only opportunity to collect anything near a comprehensive dataset for ringing - this is a rare opportunity.
I think we should also try to get a feel for levels of experience and capacity to provide continuing T&D. — A J Barnfield
Yes, it is unfortunate that the supply of ringers is not readily considered to include the supply of teachers and trainers. This could also be integrated into a potential future survey of associations.
Is the branch/district structure robust enough to achieve that these days?
Do we need to run some sort of stress test to see if the existing Guld/Association, district/branch set up would be able to collect the data? — A J Barnfield
I don't think formally tying it to guilds and associations is necessarily desireable. They are quite varied groups; some would approach the task with vim and vigour, others would be apathetic and not really get it done, and others yet might oppose it for any number of reasons. Associations however bring with them what should be a good ready-made team with the knowledge of their areas and the resources to carry out the task. Therefore, guilds would be the optimum medium, but in lieu of them, local individuals could be brought together to form a team. There would definitely need to be a guild-by-guild audit of capabilities before we leave the data collection in their hands.
I guess you would need to pick a small selection of branches with differing profiles - for example the N.Yorks branch of the YACR is largely rural and covers an area greater than the entire Kent ACR! Compare this with the districts based in large urban centres. Very different profiles and, I imagine, very different results. — Peter Sotheran
Certainly in terms of the primary focus of the team, that would be good to ensure at least some indicative data, with the contributions of others filling in the picture further. YACR's Leeds, Western, Central and Sheffield branches struck me as an interesting location to survey, as well as being an area where I have contacts and a basic understanding of the geography.
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: — John de Overa
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. — John de Overa
I think there is a danger of trying to do too much in a single project. I think it is probably prudent to separate quantitative data (which urgently needs comprehensive sampling to get decent data) and qualitative data (where acquiring themes means that getting a comprehensive sample is not as urgent - we can stratify based on the results of the quant. data). Trying to get a comprehensive sample is easier with a known quantity (towers) as opposed to an unknown quantity (ringers). I can't see a way to get to a good enough sample of individuals for quant. analysis without a bias towards prosperous towers and learners on ART, short of a firm being paid to take on the task.