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

[Robert Lewis]

At 19:18 17/11/2009, David wrote:

>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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

RAL            
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20091117/2dea0691/attachment.html>