THE National Education Union wants to shape the future of education. This is what members said they wanted from the amalgamation of the ATL and NUT: they wanted the union to be a “game changer.” This is a big ask.

How to realise this aspiration lies at the heart of the strategic campaigns of the NEU.

For 30 years, education policy in England has been framed by neoliberalism. The belief that market mechanisms will lead to improvement has led to the fragmentation of education delivery to engender competition between schools; the liberalisation of terms and conditions for education workers; and an increase in standardised high-stakes testing for children to inform league tables and “consumer choice.”

Because of this situation, we have seen a narrowing of the curriculum and a decline in children’s mental health; teacher workloads rising to unsustainable levels; a decline in teachers’ professional status; real terms pay-cuts; and, to top it all, since 2015 there have been real-terms cuts in school funding for the first time in a generation.

Successive governments’ ideological belief in neoliberal methods has made them immune to evidence and advocacy.

It is because of this that the NEU believes the only way to shift the debate is through a campaigning model that takes up ideological and political issues as well as economic ones. The union’s campaigning model also emphasises membership participation and working with allies wherever possible.

At its heart, campaigning is about building power and influence to effect change. The NEU believes it necessary to identify strategic campaigns to fully resource and genuinely try to win. Strategic campaigns are those that, if successful, will help to unpick the entire neoliberal education edifice by striking at the key links in the chain.

Each NEU campaign has a clear aim. Defining an aim makes it easier to understand how far you have to travel to be successful, which can give an indication of the resources and time needed. Defining a campaign aim also allows the identification of who the target or decision maker is that needs to be moved.

Once a specific target has been identified, it is easier to construct a strategy to apply pressure. A clear strategy then informs which tactics should be adopted at any particular time.

This may sound obvious, but it is amazing how many campaigns fail to follow this simple model, confusing tactics with strategy or being unclear about the aim or target.

The School Cuts campaign initiated by the NUT and ATL conforms to the campaign model described above. Its aim was clear: to reverse the cuts in funding imposed since 2015. The target was primarily the government, but also opposition parties. The strategy was to unite heads, teachers and parents in applying political pressure. The tactics included developing a website to show the effect of cuts on individual schools.

The campaign resulted in 750,000 people changing their votes at last year’s general election. Thousands of teachers and parents were involved in highlighting and organising around the issue and, as a result of this pressure, the government found an extra £1.3 billion for schools that was not previously available.

This isn’t enough, and the fight to win back the money lost since 2015 continues, but it is an indication that campaigning can move things.

Over the next few weeks, the membership of the ATL and NUT sections of the NEU will be deciding on priority campaigns. For each, the question that will be asked is how do we win? This is the key question that the trade union movement needs to give attention to.