Board Meeting : Saturday, January 10th 2009

[Peter Sowray]

We certainly need a set of faces who can mobilize the good will among our chess community to best effect. Instead of fighting amongst each other,we have to work together to make things happen, including the delivery of this project.

It simply is no good refusing to communicate when things go wrong. For me ,this is one of the most striking aspects of this whole affair.

Andrew,

The only rational conclusion from the announcement, and from the Board meeting summary notes, is that the project is effectively over. I'm sorry, but we all need to get over it and move on.

If the project were to go ahead, it would need a budget (which the ECF Board is not willing to provide), a project manager (which we don't have), a credible partner to produce the sets (ditto), a plan with realistic deliverables and timelines (ditto) and a communication strategy to convince the schools that they should keep the faith (now impossible).

The ECF could decide that it wanted to promote chess in schools. Rather than continue with a grandiose project like CfS, it would focus on a small pilot project in a specific geographic area. Perhaps 100 sets in 10 schools would be realistic. Once the concept was proven, it could consider rolling it out more widely.

But then the ECF would need to get people on board and treat them like adults ...

Probably better that you, the Turners, Claire, John Upham, Richard James and all the other talented folks work together without ECF involvement.

Best,

Peter

[Peter Sowray]

How will the schools perceive this latest announcement?

Let us take a moment to review what has happened to them:

1. They were invited to register for free chess sets
2. 9 - 10,000 schools registered
3. The ECF have a "database" (not a proper one but merely a mailing list) of those schools
4. The registered schools are now being invited to pay for their free sets
5. The schools start talking to each other
6. Schools decide that the ECF is a joke and should never be trusted again.
7. The CfS project is irrevocably damaged
8. The reputation of English chess is tarnished and lambasted

I hope the above goes no further than 4. but I fear it will reach 8.
I await the national press reporting with trepidation.
I gather the local journalist for GFWs patch is researching an article as we speak
Where does it stop?

John,

The vast majority of the schools will have forgotten all about it.

They will be doing other after school activities. Chess is the loser

P

[Peter Turner]

We certainly need a set of faces who can mobilize the good will among our chess community to best effect. Instead of fighting amongst each other,we have to work together to make things happen, including the delivery of this project.

It simply is no good refusing to communicate when things go wrong. For me ,this is one of the most striking aspects of this whole affair.

Andrew I am very sorry but would you please comment on what I said about the direct conflict between the current ECF CEO and the ex CEO.

Those of us at the bottom of the heap respect those willing to answer difficult quesions. One of them is clearly wrong or are they both wrong.

Andrew your contributions to this debate are most useful from someone who seems to be still involved with the 'project'. You do at least offer possible solutions to the current difficulties. We know, for your own good reasons, that you resigned as Director of the Project but remain as ECF Manager of Coaching and would clearly be the 'Lead Person' in establishing the academies. Could you let us know if you are still officially involved with the project, are your views/opinions considered, who is your line manager, who is running the project, is Peter Wilson actively involved (he was at the Board meeting and must have contributed to the debate) etc etc

Sincere regards

Peter T

[Carl Hibbard]

See the meeting report after the Holloid visit on the 17th:-

http://www.bcf.org.uk/organisation/meet ... _dec08.htm

Which said:-

2. Meeting with Holloid
DWA gave those present a précis of the meeting, which he and CEM had had with Julian Van Wyngaarden of Holloid. Holloid has made part of 500 sets, which they would complete and donate, to the ECF for our use. However, Holloid were unable to proceed with the supply of any further sets without third party sponsorship. CEM would need to contact Holloid and agree a statement with them. It was agreed that we would do a draw from the schools that had applied for the sets and boards.

[Ian Kingston]

The ECF could decide that it wanted to promote chess in schools. Rather than continue with a grandiose project like CfS, it would focus on a small pilot project in a specific geographic area. Perhaps 100 sets in 10 schools would be realistic. Once the concept was proven, it could consider rolling it out more widely.

A pilot scheme was necessary from the start - how anyone thought that the project could be rolled out to thousands of schools nationwide without some experience of the likely difficulties is a complete mystery.

More pertinently: the issue of chess sets is still acting as a distraction from what is really needed in any Chess for Schools project. Sets are easy to come by; what schools really need is people to run a chess club and to teach children. Nothing that I've read in the reports of the Board meeting seems to address this point.

[Paul McKeown]

More pertinently: the issue of chess sets is still acting as a distraction from what is really needed in any Chess for Schools project. Sets are easy to come by; what schools really need is people to run a chess club and to teach children. Nothing that I've read in the reports of the Board meeting seems to address this point.

Hear, hear!

Time to move on from this fiasco.

[Mike Gunn]

But the offer of the sets has been made. This is the crucial point. Surely what the ECF should be saying is "Holloid has let us down but we intend to honour the commitment to supply the sets, even if it takes us years." We will still go ahead with the academies, sale of support materials, organisation of coaching etc., but that is much less likely to happen if schools see we have reneged on our original promise to provide sets.

Would you (as a school) put a cheque in the post to buy support materials from an organisation which had promised you something and then withdrawn the offer?

I'm prepared to support candidates for the board who are in favour of honouring our commitments (and doing something about it) - I'm certainly not going to support anyone who suggests we walk away from this (or charge the schools for the sets)!

[andrew martin]

Responding to Peter: I am involved in the production of the pack supposed to be going into schools, but that has been the case since last summer. I am helping John Upham and Ken Coates in the formation of the Certificate of Merit website and content; so areas where the ECF can make money.....theoretically.

Communication with the board is almost non-existant. The latest announcement came as a shock. They seem completely unwilling to issue a contract to myself and Richard James; very shabby treatment.

My impression is that the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing.

Ernie; I cannot comment on differences between Chris Majer and Martin Regan; I have no personal problem with either of them

[Peter Turner]

More pertinently: the issue of chess sets is still acting as a distraction from what is really needed in any Chess for Schools project. Sets are easy to come by; what schools really need is people to run a chess club and to teach children. Nothing that I've read in the reports of the Board meeting seems to address this point.

Hear, hear!

Time to move on from this fiasco.

Ian, thank you for getting me back to the real world. I retired from teaching some 12 years ago which gave me the opportunity to go into local schools to organise chess clubs. Rotary International had a Chess Education Initiative at the time which was a great source of support. (Rotary were joint sponsors of the UK Chess Challenge then. I believe the annual trophy for the winner is still called the 'Rotary Cup'.)

This voluntary work taught me several things:
1. Whatever school I went into there would be 20-30 youngsters wanting to 'have a go' - no shortage of customers.
2. If I was not able to go there would not be a chess club that week!!
3. I could never find a suitable person to cover for me from the local chess community - often because of being at work
4. If I mentioned keeping the clubs running inthe longer term when I was unable to continue and actually asking them to consider funding via after school club monies etc then some schools were not so keen.
5. Structured teaching of any subject needs preparation and I don't think there is a huge army of people out there capable of doing it.

I'm sure it taught me a lot more than that, enjoyed every minute of it but so frustrating when so many initiatives rely on so few people to keep them knowing. I bet we all know of schools recognised as good chess schools which cease to be so when the teacher/parent finishes.

Chess sets are not really the problem but sadly they have become the problem.

Regards

Peter T

[andrew martin]

For the last time.


One of the main points of recording a DVD, producing a booklet on the rules and getting Richard James to write a book entitled ' Chess in the Classroom ' is to give existing teachers and parents the basic skills they need to start a chess club and teach kids. They can also obtan the title of 'Assistant Coach' whereby the ECF acknowledges the acquisition of these basic skills.


This is what the pack is all about.

[Ian Kingston]

For the last time.


One of the main points of recording a DVD, producing a booklet on the rules and getting Richard James to write a book entitled ' Chess in the Classroom ' is to give existing teachers and parents the basic skills they need to start a chess club and teach kids. They can also obtan the title of 'Assistant Coach' whereby the ECF acknowledges the acquisition of these basic skills.


This is what the pack is all about.

This is understood. The problem of finding the people with the time and motivation to make use of the pack remains. If the pack encourages such people to come forward the problem is at least partially addressed. I remain sceptical that many would do so, but I'd be delighted to be proved wrong.

[Chris Majer]

I had decided to make no further postings on this forum because frankly I was and am disgusted by the vitriol that is allowed. I will however make this single statement.
Subsequent to the Board meeting, I spoke with Holloid and they confirmed their commitment to the project. Discussions resulted in the statement released. Holloid remain committed to the project and have promised further financial support. So contrary to what is being said this is a positive development. I have a further meeting lined up with Holloid next week and a meeting, as was mentioned at the Board meeting, to explore sponsorship. I will release further statements on the ECF website, in due course as things clarify.

I have a day job that pays me and have to fit the not inconsiderable ECF stuff round that. In particular I am investing a lot of my personal time including days from my annual leave day resolving the issues on CfS. I find the personal attacks on my integrity particularly galling. I consider that people that walked out on their commitments to the Federation really have no right to call for the resignation of those that bailed out the Federation.

[Peter Sowray]

I had decided to make no further postings on this forum because frankly I was and am disgusted by the vitriol that is allowed. I will however make this single statement.
Subsequent to the Board meeting, I spoke with Holloid and they confirmed their commitment to the project. Discussions resulted in the statement released. Holloid remain committed to the project and have promised further financial support. So contrary to what is being said this is a positive development. I have a further meeting lined up with Holloid next week and a meeting, as was mentioned at the Board meeting, to explore sponsorship. I will release further statements on the ECF website, in due course as things clarify.

I have a day job that pays me and have to fit the not inconsiderable ECF stuff round that. In particular I am investing a lot of my personal time including days from my annual leave day resolving the issues on CfS. I find the personal attacks on my integrity particularly galling. I consider that people that walked out on their commitments to the Federation really have no right to call for the resignation of those that bailed out the Federation.

Dear Chris,

Thanks for posting. I agree with you that the style and substance of some previous posts has been over the top. If you've been hurt, I would find that understandable and it's regrettable. If in any way I've contributed, I'm sorry.

Whether you or any of your colleagues choose to resign is a matter for you. In your position(s) I would consider the following:

1) Do I find myself in a position where I am bound to fail?

2) Is my continued presence causing more harm than good?

About a year ago, I found myself answering 'yes' to both questions. So I decided to resign.

Sincerely,

Peter

[Paul McKeown]

I had decided to make no further postings on this forum because frankly I was and am disgusted by the vitriol that is allowed.

Chris, good to have you back. I think that part of the problem that the ECF currently has is its lack of communication towards chess players in England, whether members or not. I understand your comment regarding vitriol; internet fora are for some an amusement rather than a serious vehicle for communication -I personally am often wary. I would rue it, however, if you forsook this forum for such reasons, as the public need to know what its officials are doing. Carl has a role to play in preventing the larger pieces of grit from halting this particular printing press. If you have problems with his service, please discuss them with him; I'm sure he will be delighted to help, as he believes strongly in the utility of this particular medium.

Please stay.

Best Regards,
Paul McKeown.

[Paul Stimpson]

I think the Chess for Schools Project was a Dunkirk moment for English Chess.

I guess the sad part is that given the need to make something like this work the ECF was unable to galvanise its various factions and the chess community in general together to solve such a huge project.

This is the biggest failure in all this.

That the ECF still seem unaware of the scale and help required to achieve this is frankly quite unbelievable. My guess is the project is having a slow death now so that the bad feelings about this whole affair can subside slowly over time.