<html>
<body>
At 19:18 17/11/2009, David wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite=""><font size=2>Anyway, to the
specific question, I think the first point is that they should be
appointed fairly - i.e. the position should be openly advertised, and any
applicants should have to display an appropriate level of knowledge -
which could be measured with something such as getting them all to
inspect a particular ring of bells and write a report on them, in
addition to looking at their previous experience with bells.<br>
<br>
As regards ongoing assessment, it is of course not easy but something
along the lines of questionnaires to a selection of clergy / PCCs /
ringers at churches where they have advised, professionals who have
carried out work, etc would be a start. If there was a problem, this
would probably emerge.</font></blockquote><br>
One of the difficulties, I suppose, is that candidates for these (unpaid)
positions are likely to be "interested amateurs" of varying
talents and particular interests. That might make it quite challenging to
set objective tests to rate their competence across the board. And who
would be qualified to do that? An established bellfounder or hanger? The
CBC's organ specialist? The Central Council's T&B Committee? A panel
of existing DAC Bells Advisers? Some combination of the above?<br><br>
Presumably an ideal candidate would possess a wide range of skills,
encompassing a comprehensive knowledge of bell history,
mechanics/engineering and change-ringing. There must be scope for people
to "grow into the job" and I suspect that people have not
always queued-up for these positions in the past: maybe some of
them have even had their arms twisted to persuade them to take it
on! The fact that it is not unknown for one person to act as
adviser to several dioceses seems telling in itself.<br><br>
It would be quite interesting to conduct a brief survey of the current
advisers to see how, when and by whom they were appointed and why they
feel that they are qualified for the job. <br><br>
In any event, I agree with David that the appointment process should now
be open and transparent. It is encouraging to hear from Mark that the
Church appears to be making moves in that direction. But despite the C of
E's impressive hierarchy of Bishops and apparatus of "central
governance" it appears to be fairly poor at implementing
top-down policy decisions - especially when it comes to this sort of
thing.<br><br>
RAL</body>
</html>