It feels rather like the morning after the night before.

Election results, especially when unexpectedly decisive, have a tendency to trigger disproportionate soul-searching from the “losers” and wildly misplaced triumphalism for those revelling in the outcome. Tes’s output was not immune from this infection.

First, we were treated to a leaked document from Alex Kenny - national executive member of the National Education Union - frankly declaring that an “… invisible [NEU risks] withering on [the] vine”.

It was high-quality introspection in the aftermath of what many union campaigners would have seen as a dreadful election outcome. It is a matter of fact that anyone attending a state-funded education institution - from nursery to college, and on into adult education - is now set to experience a worse deal, in terms of available resources and inspection tyranny, under the new government than they would have otherwise. It is no wonder that many educators will have found this aspect of the result hard to stomach.

Then, Tes columnist David James added his snarky voice to the debate, claiming: “The NEU has become irrelevant to most teachers’ lives”. It’s a beautiful article for those who enjoy textual analysis or literary criticism but you would expect such a stark claim to be substantiated somewhere in his extended commentary. In fact, it was a challenge to locate the basis for the dismissal of Europe’s largest education union, akin to a “Where’s Wally?” spoof in which our bescarved hero is on a day off.

To prove the NEU is irrelevant to most teachers’ lives, James would have needed to establish that NEU policy and action does not connect with, or reflect the views of, at least 50 per cent of its 500,000 members. At best, the article rightly reminds the NEU to be attentive to the needs of members in the independent sector. It’s a fair point: the NEU’s breadth of membership is its extraordinary strength - across every role and sector of education. But such diversity also demands nuanced policy, that reflects far more than just the perspectives of, for example, classroom teachers in urban secondary schools.

Unfortunately, nuanced policy doesn’t play well in the hurly-burly of the blogosphere and the pronouncements of the Twitterati; nor, indeed, sometimes in the conference debating hall!

The NEU is absolutely clear that it will support every member, whatever the context of their employment. For those working in private schools, this has been abundantly evident in the campaigns across the last six months to ensure their right to remain within the Teachers’ Pension Scheme. There is no greater threat to these individual teachers’ pay and conditions. There is no more important time for staff in the independent sector to join and be active collectively within the NEU.

However - and here is the difficult counterpoint, so essential to a mature debate, but so derided by those who like their thinking to be monorail - it is also true that it is morally indefensible that there is such a sustained disparity between the privilege, experienced by those who are afforded access to the most lavish private schools, and the poverty of wealth, of opportunity, of life-chances, of education, for those large numbers of children born into disadvantage.

The layers of nuance do not, of course, end there. Independent schools are hugely varied - in intake, curriculum, assets, moral purpose - from Steiner schools to residential special schools, from Summerhill to Millfield. It is no wonder that the NEU’s position, in response to the wilder claims of the #AbolishEton brigades, has to ripple with the subtleties of deeper understanding.

And yet, also, the NEU must rage against the public funding context that has seen the worst deal since the 1950s for many of those attending state schools in the last seven years. It’s not good enough to defend the right for parents to choose to buy an education for their children if we do not also guarantee equivalent opportunities for those who cannot afford any alternative to their local state school. It is no wonder the brutal funding cuts of the last decade have added fuel to the wildfires of anti-elitism.

It is fair to say the rumours of the NEU’s irrelevance, or even the risk of withering, are both much exaggerated. So, looking forward to the future, it’s worth reflecting on one of the first public activities organised by the NEU that took place on the Monday after the general election. It was an open conversation, entitled, “What can we learn from Finland’s school system?” - with Heli Järvinen, an MP from South-East Finland and chair of two of their select committees, and Mary Bousted. Although the event had been planned for many months, the timing proved to be of real benefit for those who wanted their spirits lifted. The message of the evening would make for a worthy set of resolutions for anyone working to advance the cause of education in the UK. This is what we learned about Finland’s consistently high-performing school system:

• Very few Finnish parents ever choose to exercise the right to place their child in an independent school - there is no need.
• Yet the quality of education in Finnish schools is sustained without any external inspection service and no state-mandated tests before upper-secondary.
• High-achieving young graduates are keen to become teachers, and those working in schools enthusiastic to remain in the profession. 
• They are supported in their work, with a single trade union representing all teachers across the country that has a strong consultative voice in policy-making.

The NEU’s “Value Education: Vote Education” campaign may not ultimately have achieved the policy declarations that most members would have wanted to see in the Queen’s Speech. But, the demands of the campaign were absolutely focused and utterly relevant. Without the campaign, the lot of teachers and children would be very much worse. The NEU’s calls resonate across the profession: it’s time for adequate funding, to bring an end to child poverty, to terminate Ofsted-style inspection damage, to stop premature high-stakes testing and to create an education-employment context where teachers want to work and stay.

There are other countries that get this right: it’s a disgrace that the UK, with one of the world’s most advanced economies, should fail on these simple matters. The clarion call on behalf of our young people, our schools and the education workforce might just serve also to generate an even greater sense of professional unity.

David James, in his article, mourned the passing of the ATL (Association of Teachers and Lecturers): he might better have shed his tears for the reluctance of others to forge, with the NEU, a single union for the entire education workforce. Happy NEU year!

Dr Robin Bevan is headteacher at Southend High School for Boys. He is an executive member of the National Education Union, but writes in a personal capacity