Ringing Forums

One of the projects within the Ringing 2030 workgroups is the survey of ringers. The aim of this is to better understand how many ringers are hitting the same kind of barrier as you because it does vary hugely geographically as to when you hit a barrier of not having enough ringers at a similar level wanting to make similar progress.

The interesting theme in your posts (which I do also hear from others) is that the elite experienced ringers don’t want to bring in others to help them reach the next level. Whilst this is obviously true of some ringers there are many ringers who spend more than 75% of their ringing time helping others to improve without being stretched or challenged themself.
Some very good ringers recognise the risk that they will lose their opportunities if they don’t invest some time in bringing others through.
Maybe there is one ringer near you who could persuade the band of elite ringers to host a supported practice for up and coming ringers even just four times a year?
But I appreciate you are trying every option so it may be that this is not possible in your area, hopefully this is not true for the majority of ringers and hopefully, gradually Ringing 2030 can encourage more ringers to be helping the next ringers to improve their skills and experience.

I definitely agree that the role of the rep is now less clear and some of the people contributing in the workgroups are not reps and therefore many of the reps have little involvement in the work that is happening. This is probably part of why the communication topic came up so strongly in the AGM.

If the role of the Rep is to challenge the council to work on the things members in the association need then it often would make sense for this to be someone who is an active committee member / leader within the association. Equally if those people knew what the council was aiming to achieve they would be able to communicate it clearly to their members as they already have a role to guide their association.
I think this already works in some associations.
But tying the role to an Association leadership role makes the association role (whether it is President, Chair, Master…) bigger, and potentially harder to fill.

An online meeting is more inclusive but quite difficult to chair, especially if the aim is to outline proposals and discuss and reach agreements.
It could be done with workshops around a topic before a proposal is brought to the meeting so different reps could join different workshops depending on areas of interest and then a proposal would be brought to the big meeting for a vote.

Potentially then the in person event has a theme and aims to involve people in shaping the workgroup efforts for the coming year or two (and possibly finding more workgroup volunteers) so that it actively working on the aims of the council and not ‘just’ presenting what’s already being done or planned.

The recent online efforts for the Membership system and the budget proposal for higher fees per member seemed to work well at bringing the interested and responsible people together to discuss and ‘workshop’ potential plans. Maybe this kind of targeted workshop is a useful way of shaping workgroup activities and focus along the way, so that it’s not a once a year chance for reps to hear about what is happening.

I received the business plan and budget as a forward from one of our Reps and agree that the budget lacks detail. But I suspect that is because it is a budget plan rather than accounts so people have put in what they think they are likely to spend without yet having firm costs for activities across the coming year.
Potentially as the year progresses a quarterly or half year update could then include detail of actual spend and remaining budget per line with any update on the likelihood of spending the remaining budget or any expected overspends in an area.
I don’t see anything particular concerning or particularly new in the planned budget or the planned activities but, as expected, a kind of step up in the level of Ringing 2030 activities being initiated.

I do think it’s an issue, and I think it says something about the perceived impact of the role.
Middlesex decided to cover travel but not accommodation at least partly because covering the full cost for four reps would be our single biggest cost for the year.
If we were going to fund a full weekend for four people each year we would need to feel that the reps are able to represent the members on topics we care about and influence decisions at the council which change ringing. Whether we like it or not right now it is not seen that way because there are few real decisions taken at the council meeting.

In the Middlesex the BRF Treasurer is separate to the General Treasurer but the Essex role looks like it combines both. Their Master role takes on some of what Middlesex expects the President to do and some of what Middlesex expects the General Secretary to do so it is interesting to see the different ways of splitting the overall requirements of running an Association.

The Essex Association have this on their website: https://eacr.org.uk/about/rules/jobdesc.html
We’ve been trying to collate something similar for the Middlesex but basically just have our ‘rules’ which give a very basic line or two about the expectations of each role.

Some Associations are actively raising money / requesting donations for training as a separate thing to BRF fundraising and I think this makes good sense.

Changing BRF use of existing money would not be easy but starting to collect money for different purposes can be done alongside and gradually transition the habit of donations to the BRF into donations towards recruitment or training.

However, I think people find it harder to pin point what the donation is for or what the charity aspect is when it’s about publicity, recruitment and training.
Some people have tested charging for handling lessons but most people are still giving their time for free as part of recruitment, teaching and training so the parts which are paid for (some of the admin organisation, perhaps the lead organisers time, advertising in local media, tower donations) are varied from place to place and tend to be ongoing costs. I think this makes it harder for people to see it as a charity donation and it is more seen as part of running costs for the organisation.

BRF’s can sit on a fair amount of money as each tower only needs work every 50 - 100 years but then needs a lot of money so it is long term planning but it is likely there could be fewer projects as some churches close or towers fall silent.

I don’t think the challenge is about re-allocating existing funds but more about starting to raise money for other purposes, which requires some thought and definition around what those purposes are. How do we want to recruit and teach bellringing in order to reach more people more quickly?
This is part of the Ringing 2030 challenge and has a variety of possible solutions which people are trying in different places to see what works.
They don’t necessarily need more money although funding for centralised admin support has proved useful in ART and funding to manage an active teaching tower has proved useful in some teaching hubs.

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.

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.

Thank you Mark! I’m not sure that any of the local ringers in Wigan are part of this forum so I will pass on your message through the Lancashire Association to the Wigan band.

It looks like a chiming bell, hung from the bracket so it would be seen from outside the church. Probably for chiming with a hammer hitting against it but could be that a rope is tied to the clapper (rather than a full circle ringing bell). It would help to know the size of the bell and whether there is any inscription to say who made it and when.

This sounds like a lack of communication from the trainer. To ask someone to talk to a learner while they are ringing (or while others are ringing) means that other ringers need to know to ignore it (and / or the person asked to talk needs to judge their volume). Unfortunately some people find it very hard to ring while there is talking happening so if they didn’t know this was an instruction they can react very crossly. It is definitely worth discussing what happened and why with the tower captain and you may find that the person who shouted is now sorry that they hadn’t understood the situation and, probably, were louder and more abrupt than they expected themselves to be.
When finding helpers for training sessions many trainers know which experienced ringers can be helpers and which struggle to keep right if the learners are struggling, which are patient and calm and which get agitated when it is not going as expected. This experienced ringer may have learnt something about themselves in this experience.

surely they do but… and here is our problem… the experienced ringer leading the practice is a volunteer with no teaching training, probably no mentor to go for advice and perhaps limited interest being a better teacher. Whilst there are many great people teaching, running practices, offering guidance there are still some towers where it doesn’t happen and is unlikely to change unless someone is willing to challenge what is happening and invest time to help to improve it.
You could try asking the questions of the tower captain or teacher involved but I understand why you might not if it’s a tower you only go to occasionally and you don’t intend to get more involved.
Some might say it’s the district ringing masters role to keep an eye on the overall quality of practices but it’s probably not realistic to expect them to be able to support improvement in all towers that need it.
You can probably offer two bits of advice - tell the learner with potential which other local practices or district trainings might benefit them and suggest the teacher has a look at the ART website or CCCBR website for resources like the plain hunt toolkit, how to run an effective practice and plain bob toolkit. But without a high investment of time it is difficult to get a real step change started in a tower with an inexperienced or uninterested tower captain / teacher.

I found reference in the Mobile Belfry web page to lesson plans trialled by Jason Hughes in 2021 and I can see this is a topic in the workgroup for Young Ringers. But I can’t find the actual lesson plans! Try emailing andreadothaynesatcccbrdotorgdotuk as the workgroup lead for Young Ringers and hopefully she can send you the lesson plans which have been developed.
This information is designed for guides and scouts but might also be helpful: https://cccbr.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Bluebells-Challenge-Syllabus-March-2023.pdf
I know Jen Thomas (in the Young Ringers workgroup) has been involved with this stuff so if you can’t get hold of Andrea let me know and I can give you Jen’s email address (but not on the forum).

The Coronation was one good example of the struggle to cover multiple churches in the same day (or weekend) and Christmas is the classic example where everyone wants ringing for a carol service on a Sunday afternoon about two weeks before Christmas.
In some cases we have rung before one service then after a service elsewhere but depending on the number of ringers available it’s not possible to ring every time at every tower and there are times when we have used the opportunity to encourage the vicar to plan to talk about ringing with the congregation in the hope of finding more ringers before the next year, explaining the time it takes to learn, etc.
I think there is no easy answer, although I wish local vicars would talk to each other and try to avoid the clashes whenever possible, I guess while only ringers are impacted they won’t see a reason to off-set service times for a ringing equivalent of a pub crawl!

I think this does happen, but it depends on where you ring and how proactive you are to find / take opportunities to keep learning.
There is lots on the internet to go to if you want to see a potential path and read around the subject of method construction or similar. Many experienced ringers enjoy nothing more than a curious less experienced ringer who will listen as they explain something detailed about next steps in method ringing.
I think we don’t have a continuous learning culture in bellringing overall, there is a level of acceptance that many people reach a stage which is comfortable for them and the band they ring with so there is no further push unless either the ringer or the tower captain keeps a push for continuous progress.
This then means that for those who do want to keep progressing finding like minded ringers to ring with and more experienced ringers to support gradually requires travelling further and further.
The Cast of 1000 demonstrated this to a reasonable extent, with some lockdown ringing room sessions but a real difficulty in transferring to tower ringing to support surprise major development.

I know a couple of towers which avoid spending too much time on doubles and prefer to get ringers used to minor as quickly as possible, plain hunt and beyond. The Learning the Ropes scheme offers options to head in either direction and I think this is sensible because it does depend on the band around you.
@Martyn Bristow points out that for a learner in his band it would be tough to reach readiness for a quarter, let alone a peal, this is a definite issue in some areas and raises the question of how well people can be supported if the only option is to travel further for less frequent opportunities for developmental ringing.

The middle third - which I suppose is the one Simon is concerned about - is those ringers who could be quite good if given the chance to ring with really good ringers.

I think this is the main concern for many of the threads on this forum.
There is a reasonable size group of ringers spread across the country (world) who would like more opportunities to ring with ringers more experienced than them so that they can progress in a better development environment but there are not enough experienced ringers to go around and many of them are not that interested in ringing to support the progress of others (sometimes because they have experienced ringing with ringers who are not particularly keen to improve their ringing and then that’s frustrating).
Some people experience this inability to progress efficiently at plain hunt, for others it comes in surprise ringing or ringing on higher numbers and for some it comes when wanting to ring quarters or peals. In all cases it’s about the availability and willingness of experienced ringers to support those developing their skills and a gradual decline in the numbers of experienced ringers means that more and more new ringers will hit this frustration.
We can try to persuade experienced ringers to give their time to ringers who commit to doing their homework and focusing on high quality ringing but we also need to think about how ringers and bands can progress with simulators, regional courses, etc and some of this is already happening but there is no quick and simple answer for the ideal opportunity to ring with a strong band around you for fast progress.

We have a keen experienced conductor who likes to get people through their first peal! But I appreciate this is different to the regular peal band opportunities.
A few years ago the Central Council made a push for getting 300 (?) new people to ring a peal in a year. He got 8 people to ring their first peal that year.
On the other hand one of the most prolific peal ringers local to us rang many more peals that year but none with someone for whom it was a first peal. So perhaps you need that first opportunity with someone who’s target is to support ringers development and that helps you prove readiness to join some of the experienced peal ringing bands for a peal or two.

@John de Overa says “ There's been posts on here recently about the parlous state of many associations, even the mighty Yorkshire is struggling. Duplicating the same services across multiple associations is a poor use of scarce resources and there's no justification for continuing that situation, other than the inertia of the associations themselves.”
Which suggests that he would ‘nationalise’ (or even globalise) the ringing set up so that a ringer has one membership, one website to check for tower info and practice info, one fund for Bell Restoration (and perhaps another for training), etc.
All the volunteer time currently invested in the many Associations and Guilds would be available for ringing, teaching, developing other ringers as it takes less time to administrate one giant organisation than 30+ smaller ones.
However, what we tend to see in human nature is a desire to interact and to innovate in smaller groups. So big organisations find that individual departments or offices invent their own ‘better’ or more suited to them ways of doing things and lose some of the imagined efficiency (or lose some of the motivation to act). It becomes very hard to reach agreement on a way forward or to find a solution that works for everyone in a larger organisation so people set up smaller groups within the organisation to modify the standard to suit them and efficiency fades.
Crag looked at many models and saw potential but many people don’t want to ‘give away’ control to a single national / global organisation as they don’t feel it would consider their local / particular needs (and to some extent they are right as you only get the efficiency by standardising to at least some extent).
I don’t think that is inertia, I think it is a considered choice and would require some very convincing work to demonstrate how a single organisation would bring benefit to change people’s minds.

I was asked the other day why we don’t use Dove as the one website for tower information, including tower contacts. I think a major reason is that the chasing it takes locally to ensure the contact information is accurate would become very difficult on a national scale. So each Association maintains their own website with tower contact information and Dove simply links to these sites (on the best ones direct to the relevant tower page). Every year I ask 40 tower contacts to confirm that their information is accurate and need to chase around 15 to get an answer. If this was multiplied up to become a global task it becomes near to impossible (or it becomes a stretched out chain that each Association / Branch contact is asked to chase within their area but someone still needs to know when the task is completed per Association / Branch).
Associations have different views on publishing tower contacts emails and phone numbers vs. using generic email addresses or contact forms so Dove would need to be able to handle these differences or people would need to accept a standard approach.
This is just one example where in theory a single approach would help but isn’t a silver bullet.

Switching from local to national doesn’t straightforwardly reduce the workload and we haven’t yet found (as far as I can see) an area to demonstrate the benefit of the global organisation which would convince people in local Associations to consider converting to a direct membership model with the efficiency which comes from one website, one membership process, one treasurer ensuring financial stability, etc.