Ringing Forums

That is clearly wrong. A rounded ringer needs all the skills. — John Harrison

I'm with you on that.

But if we keep teaching new ringers the same way we will always be in that position. — John Harrison

We are emphasising the importance of listening & rhythm from the very start and we work hard with people to develop those skills. But we don't "own" our ringers, many who either learned long ago, or at other towers. Previously the whole band were "holder uppers" whereas now the most promising of our ringers, who have worked hard on ropesight & rhythm, have developed both the ability and the confidence to figure out if someone is in the wrong place and to ring around them. That's been transformative, both for them individually and the band overall.

That’s normally couched in terms of not wanting to learn fancy methods but in practice i think it imbues everything, including even ringing simple methods well. And once the collective mindset is established it affects new ringers who either adopt it themselves or leave. — John Harrison

Yes, I've rung in such towers. People who were asked help, not to take over but just to quietly support the band, were pushed aside.

I think there's another potential reason, but it can be difficult to distinguish from the scenario you describe. It's a combination of lack of knowledge, fear of failure and of being made to look inadequate.

When I started ringing my home tower the remaining handful of ringers, who were in their 70s & 80s, had been ringing CCs for decades and had never been exposed to "quality" ringing. To the then-TCs credit, his attitude was if he could at least keep the bells ringing there was the opportunity for things improve. He was a major force behind our rehang and when the time came he stood aside gracefully for the new TC. He still comes to all our social events and has an occasional ring with us, along with the other ringer who helped keep the bells going for decades. We owe them both an immense debt of gratitude and I think it's a good illustration of how people can make a significant contribution to ringing, whatever level they are at.

People I teach become competent ringing rounds before they have to integrate ropesight and coping with the variability of other ringers. — John Harrison

As do we.

Which is one of the reasons Gordon Lucas said they were not a sensible step on the route to learning tithe skills to ring methods — John Harrison

I agree, but we have to ring with the band we have, not the one we aspire to have. When we started out on the journey the band couldn't get past back rounds in PH without firing out, for a whole raft of reasons which were all down to CC ringing. We've had to address those issues *and* keep service ringing going, which currently depends on CCs.

We shouldn’t (and I don’t). Blame the teachers not the pupils. — John Harrison

That was the "we" as in "ringing in general".

I know of one teacher who point blank refuses to teach other than primarily by rhythm, with ropesight second, and CCs are banned. It causes all sorts of problems as soon as they ring anywhere else. They stare at the floor, they can't cope with the inevitable wobbles and tempo changes and they are impossible for the conductor to put right, because "After X" is verboten. It's an approach based on theory than in principle may seem sound, but we have to deal with real ringers, not theoretical ones.

. I have never had a pupil who couldn’t progress from solo bell control to rounds with a simulator with no visuals. — John Harrison

Agreed, and ditto.

I risk assessed my tower. We are all over mid-60s and into our 70s. Under current cisrcumstances I've given our tower 5 years of ringing remaining!! Let's hope it much longer! — Phillip George

We've grown from 4 to 8 service ringers over the last couple of years (not counting COVID), plus a couple of regular practice visitors. That's all adults, the majority between 50 & 70. A couple are returning ringers who hadn't rung for decades, the rest are new ringers. We are seriously thinking about how the tower band could ring a QP, for the first time in at least 50 years. Will the current ringers ever be a Red Zone band? Perhaps not, but if we can keep the band moving forwards and provide a good "seed bed", perhaps the next generation will be.

We haven't done anything special - no huge recruitment drives etc. But we have agreed as a band that we want to learn and get better together, which we have. That's developed a virtuous circle where people have a sense of achievement, increased enjoyment, broadened horizons and a desire for more of the same.

How soon? Before they can ring steadily and hold to a rhythm? — John Harrison

As soon as they can ring steadily and with good control on their own, for a decent stretch.

That tends to confirm that they have been conditioned to rely on ‘seeing who to follow’ and then making a last minute action just after they do so, which undermines any sense of rhythm they might have acquired. And when they fail to look at the right rope, or it’s not there, they have no means’s of knowing where to place their next blows, even approximately. — John Harrison

Absolutely agree but as they start by ringing rounds, seeing / following is inevitable. But CCs are the next step and they are all about following bell numbers. I do know a couple of people who think that CCs should only ever be taught by place, but tradition means that's not realistic in the majority of towers. We have one learner who could cover almost immediately she started ringing with the band because she can hear where she is in the order, we've encouraged her to make the most of her "superpower". We also drill in to people from the very start that ringing by "Follow X" is almost impossible to avoid but it's a dead end, and that they need to focus on rhythm & place.

However in the end you can't force people, particularly adults. I can think of someone who says he can't hear his bell so his striking is poor as he has no feedback loop. He's hyper-bell number focussed, I stopped running sim sessions for him as he insisted on having the visuals on and on knowing the bell numbers beforehand - I repeatedly told him the issues with that to no avail, and I didn't feel I should be an enabler for bad habits.

On the other hand I do understand the difficulties as I was in the same position myself not that long ago and I remember how hard it was to switch to place & rhythm - but I 100% knew I had to, it was the point I nearly gave up. We have someone who is ringing PH after just a few months, but is doing it by bell number. She absolutely knows she needs not to be doing that, last practice she was asking me how to switch to by-place. Straight after that she rang hunt bell to Cloister Doubles for the first time, I stood behind and each time she came off the lead she'd hold up and ask me which bell she was over, which I refused to do. Once she realised I wasn't going to tell her she just "got on with it", and made a decent fist of it.

Learning to ring is just hard. That's one of the attractions for people who stick at it and progress.

For initial teaching I never do turn on visuals because my aim, as stated previously, is to help the learner develop confidence in using their rhythm and listening skills before they are exposed to the visual element, which tends to dominate and crowd them out. — John Harrison

I think that's a good idea but we get people ringing Rs & CCs with the band as soon as possible so they then tend to freak out if they can't see bells, even virtual ones. So I get them ringing PH steadily on the sim with the screen on, and then turn it off without warning them :naughty: I haven't found anyone yet who can't keep going, even if they wobble more.

I agree with the rest of what you say about the problems with "by bell number" teaching. As a wise old ringer said to me:

Ropesight is always easier if your rhythm is right, and gets harder the further out you get. No; it's not fair. If you ring at the right speed, you get to the right place at the right time, and, hey presto, the rope you *should be* following will be the rope you *are* following, and will be easy to spot, even though you don't need to, because you've got the bell in the right place anyway. If your rhythm gets a blow or two out, spotting the rope is harder, because it seems not to be where it should be (because you're not where you should be). The better you are at ringing, the easier it gets!

You're absolutely right John. You haven't missed it because I haven't written it yet! — Simon Linford

Thanks Simon, I looked at the online contents and there's a "Great Expectations" article also by you in the current issue and I didn't know if that was the followup or not :smile:

As for liking the answer or not, I'm just happy that you are talking about the issues, much of the ringing community seem to be sleepwalking towards the abyss. As I said, I agree with your assessment of the current situation and although there perhaps might be disagreement about steps forward, without acceptance of the issues there can't even be that. So thank you, and Lucy, for using your voices to make it more visible, I for one appreciate it,

it's an incorrect assertion anyway. Abel (and I believe all the other simulator packages) support a "moving ringers" display, where you can ring one bell whilst the simulator provides both the sound and a moving display of the other ringers. It will even highlight the ringer you are supposed to be over. That's how I got my ropesight, particularly on 8 as I don't have access to an 8 bell method band and ropesight has always been a struggle.

Having said that, now I'm further on I practice at least half the time without the visuals. It does mean you really have to concentrate on listening and rhythm as it's all you have, and it's easier to concentrate on navigating the line without having to deal with the visual aspect, as you say. And yes, not having the added pressure of being the crasher-abouter in a real band is also a help :grin:

But I think visuals do have their place, without them my striking accuracy suffers a bit and things like where you pass the treble or who you consistently dodge with at the front/back aren't visible. So it's horses for courses, how you use can best the sim really depends on exactly what which skill you are concentrating on.

I think you are also right about simulators being underused in many towers, ours is used multiple times each week and is the standard learning tool for our ringers who are progressing onto methods. As a band that's attempting to move from 4 call change ringers into 8+ method ringers, it's a vital tool for those starting methods - we don't have a band to put around them and although they all are happy to support earlier stage people at practices, they inevitably spend most of their time at practices in a support role rather than on their progress. The sim gives them a chance to work on their skills, with a "band" that doesn't make mistakes. There are other benefits as well, the simulator has given them confidence to "ring around" others who aren't in the right place which means we can keep going when previously we'd crash out.

Finally, the system we have in our tower is none of the above but is commercially available from John Thorpe. It uses solid state sensors so no dirt/light issues, it has a USB interface, it can be used with multiple laptops/bells simultaneously and it's USB powered so we don't need mains for it in the bell chamber.

I know I shouldn't worry about silly individuals like this but makes me feel really undervalued as a ringer and I was wondering if anyone else has had similar problems? — Oliver Lee

Unfortunately, yes. And it's even worse if you are an adult starter. Whilst the majority of ringers are fantastic, there are a small number who aren't, and it's they who stick out - and in your memory! I generally try to just ignore them but if it gets bad enough I just stop ringing with them, I know one tower who lost three of us in rapid succession because of one individual's attitude. As yours sounds like a one-off encounter, I'd just ignore it and move on with your ringing - good luck in your quest to ring on higher numbers :smile:

Thanks for the details, and that's a very impressive diary page!

Our branch runs elementary, intermediate and advanced practices each month — John Harrison

What sort of level are each of those?

as well as a weekday afternoon and Saturday practice for all levels — John Harrison

So how many opportunities are you providing each month? It sounds like at least five?

Branches around me seem to think one monthly practice is enough, and quite often they are more like outings than teaching practices. I'm sure that's fine once you reach a certain level, but for people trying to progress, once a month is nothing like often enough.

I do suspect he might have learned “who to follow” but always goes on about places counting. — Martyn Bristow

Yeah, I've seen that as well - they rattle on about places but will only ring plain courses and on one bell :wink:

It sounds like your towers are going well, but because of certain proactive individuals. We need more of them. — Martyn Bristow

I'm sure there are more out there, I think finding and supporting them will be the trick. How best to do that is a difficult question...

But there needs to be focussed practices for all levels — Martyn Bristow

I think there also needs to be overlap between practices. You don't need to be a Surprise Major ringer before you can start to support those on the lower rungs of the ladder. It's not realistic or fair to expect people at the upper levels to provide support all the way down (although of course it's great if they do), and there aren't the numbers needed to do that anyway.

And there are benefits to everyone involved - our ringers who are further on have learned the skills needed to "ring around" wobbly learners, and will stand behind them if asked. That's not just benefited the learners, the more advanced folks have commented on how much it's helped them as well. A rising tide lifts all boats, and all that.

How does he think that's ever going to work? Sounds like he can only ring by bell numbers himself?

Our progress has been internally led and there have been a number of things that have helped: getting the bells rehung, a smooth handover between the retiring and new TC, an excellent new TC, a "returning ringer" who retired back to the area and most recently our new vicar, who is a Surprise Major ringer and came to our practices before he was even in post! And probably most importantly, a band who have a realistic understanding of where they are at and the challenges ahead, but who want to have a go, who are very supportive of each other and who's attitude is "We are all in this together". There's still a long way to go, but people seem to be enjoying the journey.

I think it's much more difficult in your scenario, "it gets a bit delicate" sounds like a huge understatement :grin: I wonder if the way forwards is a parallel path for those who want to "get on" and can't do so in their home towers, with separate reasonably local and fairly frequent practices? I learned to ring mostly outside of my home tower and I've seen that approach work well in one guild I ring in, but the culture there is that people ring in more than one tower from the start, so nobody bats an eyelid. I think it's much trickier to extricate people from "stuck in a rut" towers without causing all sort of ructions.

I think the lack of a “career path” a stumbling block to a lot of people. ART have their levels and other schemes have other milestones. But it’s down to the teacher currently to use a teaching framework. — Martyn Bristow

ART is great for getting people to handle a bell. There are a series of clear steps, with a purpose and success criteria for each. With training & practice it's easy for teachers to spot issues and give feedback, because it's a visible, physical task. However when it comes to "Learning Methods", teaching gets much more difficult. Not only does bell control have to improve markedly, much of the new skillset that's required is internal - ropesight, counting places etc - and that's far harder to teach and observe.

The usual approach is "Now learn Plain Bob" but Plain Bob is a poor choice of teaching method; although it seems trivial to ring to experienced ringers, it needs multiple new skills to ring properly. We need to be teaching the new skills individually and specifically first. Want to give people practice at coming on and off the lead accurately? Treble to Bastow. Want to help with ropesight & place counting? Single Court Minimus. Want to give them dodging and place making practice? Double Oxford front work. The exact tools used don't matter, what's important is breaking the process down into smaller steps and providing lots of repetitions in a short space of time, just like we do with bell handling. @Phil Ramsbottom has already said this in detail and more eloquently that I can.

There also needs to be theory training, away from a rope. Not "How to learn method X", but "How to learn methods". I ran a course for our tower earlier this year, the aim was to demystify the terminology, explain why ringing by place is needed rather than by bell number and to give people a "theory toolkit" they could dip back into as they progressed. For one ringer the lightbulb was that methods share a lot of common "phrases" and that once you've learned them, you can reuse them. There's a lot that's taken as read by experienced method ringers that isn't immediately obvious to people starting out method ringing.

In my tower, people don’t see progress because the whole band has issues, some lack commitment but ultimately they’re is nothing to look up to. We need role models for ringing — Martyn Bristow

The game changer for our band was asking people to learn Single Court Minimus before practice, and then successfully getting through it after about half an hour of trying. Yes it's not hard but it was the first thing other than PH the band had rung, and it was done without outside help. The confidence boost that gave people was huge, because it showed that method ringing was something we could actually aspire to. After that people started turning up with blue lines printed out, they wanted homework and so on. I think the benefits of giving people a sense of achievement and ongoing progress are difficult to underestimate. In our case we didn't really have any choice as we don't have a method band so there was no possibility of slotting people individually into a solid band.

The issue of role models is an interesting one. We've had a number of external training events at our tower, with ringers at the Surprise level, Although we've invited band members to attend, it hasn't been a huge success. The two adjectives I heard the most were "daunting" and "patronising", and nobody is going to do their best under those circumstances, even if their feelings are unfounded. On the other hand, we recently had a family of three visiting ringers turn up unannounced on a Sunday which meant we could ring CCs on 8, and with their support the band rang their socks off in terms of striking - we found out afterwards that one of the ringers was a 1000+ pealer. The main difference between the two occasions was expectations, not the visitors, so the dynamics of "outside help" can be a tricky thing to get right.

The aim was never to have done the recruitment done by 203 — Martyn Bristow

Sorry, no, the R2030 document says exactly that:

• 10000 more active ringers by 2030 (new and returning)
• Half of them under the age of 30
• 30000 people under the age of 20 have heard about or had a go at ringing
• Retention rate of at least 50% of new recruits
• Double the number of teachers and trainers of ringing

Ringing is led by volunteers, and there’s been a struggle to get contributions to the tasks. — Martyn Bristow

How is that surprising when it offers nothing at all for the people who are most likely to have the time and inclination to help? Worse than that, ringing culture in general tells them that they are not of any interest, have little to offer and won't ever amount to anything.

Personally, I do what I can .. but I have a full time job and a tower to teach — Martyn Bristow

Same here - I'm still working full time and have taught half the people in our tower how to ring, even though I'm a "Will never amount to anything" ringer myself. I didn't do it because I thought I was well qualified, I did it because there was literally nobody else, and the tower was dying.

I admire your determination, but personally I've had any temptation to involvement repeatedly beaten out of me. Good luck!

And what do you expect to be left behind if/when they have all gone? — John Harrison

If it is to reverse decades of decline it will have to start growing again from the roots, not the top. Will it be able to do so? I don't know but I'm doubtful, particularly as many of the facilities we depend on are at risk as well.

In our tower the ‘top end’ ringers that you want to depart range in age from under 18 to over 80 so it will be a long wait. — John Harrison

If your tower was representative of the majority of towers, we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place. Ringing, in particular elite ringing, is dominated by network effects, and in many places, that network has already gone. And in others, its unsustainable.

There is also a dependence on local support for both teaching, handling and providing support for more advanced ringing. If this local support also falls away, then again, the vitality of the societies is affected. — Tristan Lockheart

Yes, you are completely right. The video I posted a link to earlier about British Cycling's experience of how deliberately focusing on the grass roots is a clear demonstration of how interest and activity at the lower levels of an activity is a prerequisite for a vibrant elite level, but ringing somehow believes it is different. It isn't.

With the current structure and dynamics of ringing, it is not sensible to expect any decline within one area or part of ringing to be contained and not spread to other parts of ringing. — Tristan Lockheart

Agreed, it's an idiotic belief. But apparently widespread.

Ringing 2030 is solely about growing grass routes ringing in a sustainable way. But also keeping the grass routes growing, as people have joined and faded due to poor opportunity. — Martyn Bristow

R2030 has been going for 3 years now, nearly halfway to its target date and it's had no impact whatsoever on the ringing in my area, in fact most ringers here have never heard of it.

R2030 is a misdirected flight of fantasy. The emphasis is entirely on young (i.e. under 30) ringers, "young" appears 7 times in the "business plan", "adult", not at all, despite the fact that most people currently turning up at towers wanting to learn aren't in the only demographic R2030 considers worth attention.

As for the fantasy target of 10,000 new ringers with 50% retention, according to Dove there are "1,602 full-circle rings which are in the British Isles, have 6 bells, are ringable, and have a practice". So in the next 4 years every one of those towers is going have to recruit, train and retain at least 12 new ringers, assuming every single tower is capable and willing to do so. It's utter nonsense.

The work I’m doing is all about getting new people onto towers, getting a better balance and with better awareness. If there’s any other ideas to fixing the grass routes please suggest and get involved — Martyn Bristow

I admire your tenacity and wish you the best of luck, but I believe that with the current strategy and glacial rate of progress, you are doomed to fail. As for involvement, why would I participate in something that isn't interested in addressing the challenges faced by ringers such as me? I have "engaged" in the past, I was briefly a non-voting member of the ART board, brief because it quickly became obvious that what was required was a compliant gopher, not someone to represent the silent, struggling ringing majority.

One of the biggest problems that ringing faces is that it's already fractured into two halves, with the top half thinking that they know how to fix things based on attempting to wind the clock back to how ringing was when they were learning, almost universally when they were young. That world no longer exists and can't be regained. As I've said, my belief is that until those people are gone, ringing will continue on its death spiral.

Ringing 2030 addresses that partially, but that relies on its leaders driving it on — Martyn Bristow

Ringing 2030 is irrelevant, it's a top-down effort where the same people that have been talking amongst themselves for decades about elite ringing are doing the same yet again. It will not fix ringing's grass roots problems.

I keep meaning to look into the data of peals and quarters but i never get time — Martyn Bristow

That's also irrelevant, it's solely a measure of elite ringing, and I suspect mostly of how many elite ringers are now retired and have more time to ring peals. It's also a very lagging indicator of the state of ringing.

If you persist in measuring the wrong thing and then basing your decisions on that it's inevitable that your decisions will be wrong.