Ringing Forums

My experience is that few people nowadays take up ringing as it is a service to the church. It is no longer seen as a duty to their parish which means that they have limited interest in anything other than their local band — Roger Booth

. My ringing is a hobby (I hate that term!). I always ring for church services as I see that as an important part of ringing but it tends to be an "also ran", being only about 10% of my total. We never major on service ringing or church for new ringers.

The problem with the traditional system is that too few communications get down to the ringers at grass roots level. — Roger Booth

I am currently trying to promote discussion about communications in my Association.

However, it's not surprising that WhatsApp groups targeted at those with specific interests (e.g weekday ringing, training events, surprise major practices, handbell ringing, quarter peals etc) are significantly more popular. — Roger Booth

WhatsApp is an excellent platform. Currently I only use it in my own tower situation, but it is quicker and easier than email and lends itself to instant communication and interaction. It is also very flexible being able to quickly accomodate new groups/subgroups for specific projects/events.

If people can pay their subs on-line and receive regular communications about activities that they are interested in taking place nearby and which are of interest to them, ringing will flourish. — Roger Booth

I collect subs from everyone in the tower and pay online. That's the best we can do but it saves a dozen individuals submitting them. I am left with gathering cash. Not ideal and perhaps many Towers Secs would not want to do this! I am not sure if members have been canvassed about what ringing activities might interest them!

Activity would be driven in a modern bottom-up way by the membership, rather than the old rigid Victorian top-down way. — Roger Booth

In general we prefer to be lead than to lead. Your modern concept, with which I agree, requires more effort from more people, not only Association and District officers. The first step in any change is to wake up and see that we need to do it, and we are still asleep on this one!
It is important that I point out that I am speaking in general terms. In my Association there are some successful initiatives but at a local level we are still fairly Victorian. .

[

but I do think it is possible to teach the steps between PB and Surprise in a more structured and "active" way. — John de Overa

I agree John, step changes for advancement. I hold sim practices every week and we practice dodging and place making which can be done quite easily in isolation but when it comes to putting in a single dodge in PB5 it is almost impossible for some. The context is different when they are ringing in a 3 dimensional virtual circle rather than with just one other bell ringing. I learned when I was 14 with a good mentor and opportunities. It makes a difference.
Ringing is a highly complex activity. I often quote Coldplay's The Scientist "...nobody said it was easy, nobody said it would be so hard..lets go back to the start..."

"Spot on there. I went on a course specifically for dynamic bell control some time ago and it helped. It still took a while to get to the "automatic" stage though, most of which was on a tower sim.How do you think the could be addressed? I think setting expectations for learners from the start is important, the problem is that sometimes it's undermined by the "bell number" brigade"

I would like to know how to address the problem too.

Simple things don't get taught. e.g.
Not looking/focussing on the sally at handstroke, which wastes time and energy and stops the ringer seeing more important things.
Taking rope at backstroke.
Letting rope out at backstroke.

I find that they understand the principle of dynamic bell control and can see it when demonstrated but are unable to put it into action on the fly. Too much to think about and lack of confidence! Being an adult learner can be a problem. Brain age and too much analysis hold can them back.

But poor skill sets aren't only a problem at beginner level. I was teaching bob calling on Saturday with ringers who can ring basic SMinor and Major. They couldn't hear the treble. They couldn't tell me which bell was making 4 blows in PB5. No chance!! Speaking generally, we are not taught to listen or watch other bells. We are not taught to write out and study methods. We go from PB6 to Cambridge6 and haven't had chance to develop and practice dynamic bell control in easier, intermediate methods. The step up from PB5 is enormous!

"One of the major factors holding back change in ringing is the high level of emotional attachment ringers tend to have to particular towers,associations..."
"This type of loyalty used to be a benefit, now it is a hinderance."
But at the moment this is all we have and without it ringing would fold. I would say that ringers in my (typical?) local, rural area are concerned with weekly practices (often shared and on a tower rota) to enjoy their ringing. They have little thought for the future of ringing and don't engage much with the Association. They are loyal to their weekly routines, which is keeping ringing going -- ftb.

"... I don't mind icing on a decent cake. But then if the cake is good it probably doesn't need icing".

But the cake needs to look attractive to non-ringers. And whilst on the subject of ringers, we tend to see ringing, and all its important facets, from our own point of view, which often can be somewhat blinkered..

It is ok to want to improve our personal ringing skills at whatever level we want and can achieve. We all want to raise our ringing capabilities and there is absolutely nothing wrong with this. But I am looking at the problem from a different angle. My comments below are not directed to you personally. I think they are applicable to a lot of ringers and ringers in positions of repsonsibility.
Question: What is your main wish in life?
Answer: To be happy! WRONG answer.
Possible correct answer: I want a fulfilling job/career which benefits me and my familiy and enables me to be a constructive part of my family and community where my positive contribution will be rewarding and which will make me happy. etc etc.
Question: What do you want to achieve in ringing?
Answer: I want to ring surprise minor/major (or whatever), ring at loads of towers, ring quarter peals, be a tower captain or association officer so that I can say that I am a tower captain, or association officer. WRONG answer!
Possible correct answer (depending on what you want to do with your ringing, and delete which ones may not apply): I want to enable and develop ringers and towers by supporting their ringing, creating opportunities helping them to realise their potential, as well as ringing to my wish list. I would like to be trained in tower management and communication, interacting in my social and ringing circles so that other ringers become enthusiastic about ringing and understand their responsibility in the tower and community. I want to be part of a team structure (tower or district) which is forward thinking and pro-active as well as giving me the opportunity to reach my technical ringing potential.
I know --- It's a big ask!!!

The potential of most ringers is not being realised. This is because the leaders e.g. tower captains, district or association officers or whomever, and I am of course speaking generally, are not leaders at all and do not understand or own their responsibility for developing ringing and ringers.
Sadly, we are the future of ringing! We hold it in our hands!
It is down to us to do something about it. We seem to have no awareness of the problem or energy or enthusiasm for making sure that ringing survives.
One essential ingredient, I am sure, is communication, telling each other and the general public what we are doing and what we are going to do, then telling them again!. With all the social media platforms available there is no excuse for not doing this. At least that gets us out there! But we can't work in tower isolation, we have to come together, at least at a local level.
I know with pretty much certainty which towers in my district will not be ringing within the next ten years but we're not even talking about it! Many ringers aren't at all interested in ringing*, only their weekly routines.
*Ringing isn't only about ringing - it's also about our relationship with our stakeholders - the church, schools, parish councils, the community, each other etc!

I think the main table on page 4 is relevant too. "Personnel records etc..." which are 75 years, and "Disclosing and barring...etc

I have finally heard from my diocese about SG records retention and they sent me this document which they claim as being the latest issue. (see from page 3).

My comment is probably for a new discussion.
I am pleased that there is to be a project for 2030. However "together" we seemed in the last week or so, I think that ringing is fragmented at the moment. Certainly there are a lot of good things going on in centres of excellence and its great to see younger ringers making a significant mark, but generally speaking we continue to live off the fat of the land.
I am 71. When I die, I take with me all my knowledge and experience. My learners will never achieve the experience I have because they all started at a "mature" age, and that also means that I can't necessarilly pass on my knowledge either. We are an active tower but with a CC and PB5 repertoire. That's ok, they are a loyal bunch of ringers and we do other things together as well - but I'll give it another 10 years - maybe!
We will work hard towards succession (the queen is dead, long live the king!), but I very much feel that we are on our own. I constantly post on FB, Twitter, Insta and on our community email list to let people know what we are doing.
There needs to be a paradigm shift amongst ringers at grass roots level!
That's all!

Thank you for posting this, we need up to date and concise information so it's much appreciated. However, (and this is not your fault), this is now confusing because although the amended document now mentions D-Day as 9th September they have not re-dated it to the 9th, not helpful to anyone who is only aware of the original 8th Sep document!

I was concerned that I might have given the incorrect information about records retention, so I emailed my diocese.
I am still waiting to hear but I found this on an SG document I received in July 2019. It might have changed since then.
"Please note personnel records relating to lay workers whose role involves contact with children and vulnerable adults including applications, references, disciplinary matters, job descriptions, training and termination documentation should be kept for 75 years after employment. The files should also include all documentation concerning allegations, investigations and risk assessments regardless of the findings."
If I receive a reply from the diocese I will revert.

AS I said in my original post, I "believe" it to be 70 years. I feel I should get more accurate information for myself and others so I am waiting a reply from the diocesan SG officer. I'll share if I get a useful answer.

I believe it is 70 years.

No, neither for QPs but I stay (not in the ringing room) until they go into changes and return before they finish making sure that everything is ok, collect fees and see them safely off the premises.

Paul, you make some interesting points. Ringing lacks stability and experience in some areas. PCCs often lack knowledge and experience in dealing with bell ringers.
There are also too many "experts". Should ringers refer to the CCCBR, or the church, for safeguarding guidelines? Who are our masters? The result of all this is contributing to a confused and risk averse culture. This is why it is important for towers to be represented on the PCC or at least have a very good, close working relationship with it. I have always said that effective communication can solve a lot of problems!
I am fortunate in having a foot in both camps, as an SG officer and a ringer, so I do my best to protect people in my parish and visiting ringers from excessive beaurocracy.
We have visitors next week. No SG qualificiations needed by them, no bits of paper to sign, no forms! As an SG trained person appointed by my PCC I will be there to meet and greet, and stay with them during their visit, as any good host should! (and I might even get a ring!!). Thats all that is needed - just as in the military, a few trained, appointed personnel and then let everyone else get on with it!.
We are fortunate to have the resource in our tower to manage this, and a deputy as back up. Visiting ringers are always welcome but if we can't personally meet them they are not allowed to come.

Answer to Q1.
A DBS certificate can record police convictions, reprimands and warnings. It can advise of any issues around children and adults barred lists and any other relevant information disclosed at the Chief Police Officers discretion. Having something disclosed would not necessarilly mean that a person is unsuitable to visit a church to ring bells.
If there were problems with the certificate this should be discussed between the provider (e.g. the church of england) and the applicant, and if necessary appropriate safeguards put in place to monitor or restrict a person from doing a particular activity.
DBS certificates are strictly private and confidential and the response to a tower asking "Have you got a clean DBS certificate?" would not necessarilly be straight forward.
An independant third party (tower) cannot fully assess a person based on the certificate alone and in any case it's not authorised to make any judgement without reference to the provider. Also, most ringers will not need to have DBS certificates.
If we start monitoring them ringing could become more difficult than catching a ferry at Dover!

We rang four lots of 60 on 3rds this weekend as a preamble to the local amdram performances. We tried some closed hstroke leading which was quite good and brilliant fun. It also produced some good striking. We had excactly 20 minutes ringing on each occasion so gave us time to "get into it" so to speak. (I like set piece ringing but would never confime call changes to 60 on 3rds. That system happens to be the best known but there are plenty of others, or compose them yourselves).

Umm, that's not true in my diocese - at the PCC level there's no flexibility with regard to deciding what training is needed for ringing, they just have to implement what they are told by the diocese. The only relevant optional training is safer recruitment for TCs, if they are involved in the recruitment of paid staff - which I suspect is almost never going to be the case. — John de Overa

I agree. The same in my diocese, training modules are determined by them, not the PCC.

I apologise unreservedly for using such a generalisation.