[Bell Historians] was More Telegraph letters, now DBA's

[David Bryant]

"I would be most interest to know why David has such a jaundiced view on bells advisors. 
It is true that there are many different standards amongst them in how they go about their jobs, what they regard as their brief and so on but I'll bet that everyone of them thinks they are doing a good job, whatever the rest of the of the ringing fraternity may think about them. So HOW would you go about appraising DBA's?"


Afraid I have a very jaundiced view of the CofE generally. There are plenty of decent people at grass-roots level, but as an organisation I've found it to be thoroughly unpleasant, arrogant and unwilling to answer reasonable questions about its procedures (or lack of them).

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.

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.

I'm certainly not saying that all bells advisers do a bad job - many are excellent. However I do think that the situation, as certainly does occur, whereby a diocese needs a bells adviser and somebody suggests old Fred, or whoever, and he gets appointed for an open-ended term with no appraisal, is wrong - he may be really good, but equally he may be hopeless and still stay in the position for years.

David
           
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20091117/5375c75d/attachment.html>