Virtual democracy
in action
Leadership Focus journalist Nic Paton finds out how this year’s Annual Conference still went ahead despite covid-19.
One consensus that emerged from the experience of lockdown back in the spring was no matter how hard you worked at producing great virtual or remote learning for pupils – and many head teachers threw almost everything but the kitchen sink at it – it just wasn’t a straight-up replacement for the face-to-face classroom learning experience.
That’s why, of course, even with the UK wrestling with an intensely challenging autumn and winter due to covid-19, shutting schools down nationally is pretty much (and rightly so) a last resort for the government.
Yet, at the same time, remote and virtual learning, meeting and conferencing have rapidly become everyday norms for many of us in our working lives. It is very clear that when managing a highly infectious virus, the risk/benefit equation of gathering large numbers of people physically together in a single space indoors doesn’t add up, unless (like in the classroom setting) it is deemed absolutely vital.
This was very much the dilemma that faced NAHT last month when it came to rescheduling its already delayed annual general meeting (AGM) and Annual Conference, which if it were a normal year, would have been held in Cardiff in May.
As Magnus Gorham, NAHT director of democracy and governance, explains, the result was NAHT breaking new ground by developing and delivering the very first virtual AGM and Annual Conference in its 123-year history.
“The annual event serves as our decision-making forum, and so, it is the primary way that a trade union and democratic organisation such as NAHT sets its policy agenda, democratically through the members,” he tells Leadership Focus.
“The problem with not being able to hold it as usual in May was that we’ve been in a bit of a policy vacuum since then. Without the AGM, we couldn’t officially sign off last year’s policy year, and we couldn’t establish this year’s policy year. But, like everyone, given the uncharted water we knew we were in and the clear risks, still, around holding face-to-face events, we knew we had to be pragmatic.”
Once NAHT decided that the only viable solution would be a remote conference, the first question was, at a practical level, could the ‘experience’ be replicated virtually?
One consensus that emerged from the experience of lockdown back in the spring was no matter how hard you worked at producing great virtual or remote learning for pupils – and many head teachers threw almost everything but the kitchen sink at it – it just wasn’t a straight-up replacement for the face-to-face classroom learning experience.
That’s why, of course, even with the UK wrestling with an intensely challenging autumn and winter due to covid-19, shutting schools down nationally is pretty much (and rightly so) a last resort for the government.
Yet, at the same time, remote and virtual learning, meeting and conferencing have rapidly become everyday norms for many of us in our working lives. It is very clear that when managing a highly infectious virus, the risk/benefit equation of gathering large numbers of people physically together in a single space indoors doesn’t add up, unless (like in the classroom setting) it is deemed absolutely vital.
This was very much the dilemma that faced NAHT last month when it came to rescheduling its already delayed annual general meeting (AGM) and Annual Conference, which if it were a normal year, would have been held in Cardiff in May.
As Magnus Gorham, NAHT director of democracy and governance, explains, the result was NAHT breaking new ground by developing and delivering the very first virtual AGM and Annual Conference in its 123-year history.
“The annual event serves as our decision-making forum, and so, it is the primary way that a trade union and democratic organisation such as NAHT sets its policy agenda, democratically through the members,” he tells Leadership Focus.
“The problem with not being able to hold it as usual in May was that we’ve been in a bit of a policy vacuum since then. Without the AGM, we couldn’t officially sign off last year’s policy year, and we couldn’t establish this year’s policy year. But, like everyone, given the uncharted water we knew we were in and the clear risks, still, around holding face-to-face events, we knew we had to be pragmatic.”
Once NAHT decided that the only viable solution would be a remote conference, the first question was, at a practical level, could the ‘experience’ be replicated virtually?
“For example, issues around assessment and inspection in the new education reality,” continues Magnus.
“While we have been very pleased with the experiment of a virtual conference, and that should get us to next May, the aim is for us to, hopefully, go back to having a face-to-face conference. So we can go back to doing things as we would have done them had lockdown not occurred,” he adds.
At a practical level, there were challenges around simply making the day work smoothly on a remote/virtual basis. “We wanted people to be on the stream for virtually the whole day. So, there was a combination of pre-recorded videos and some ‘live’ speeches. Another issue was voting. We employed the company that used to do the voting electronically at our Annual Conference in the past, who were able to put in a process to enable voting to be done remotely. So that was a challenge we overcame,” says Magnus.
Watch NAHT president Ruth Davies’s speech below.
“A further logistical issue was ensuring that people could be piped in and out remotely at the right time while juggling that with people in the studio. And then there was the challenge of everyone’s internet connections – something that we, of course, did not have any control over.
“The whole experience was about trying to replicate as much as we possibly could of our Annual Conference, while acknowledging that, within the constraints of a virtual format, we were not going to be able to do everything.
“For example, issues around assessment and inspection in the new education reality,” continues Magnus.
“While we have been very pleased with the experiment of a virtual conference, and that should get us to next May, the aim is for us to, hopefully, go back to having a face-to-face conference. So we can go back to doing things as we would have done them had lockdown not occurred,” he adds.
At a practical level, there were challenges around simply making the day work smoothly on a remote/virtual basis. “We wanted people to be on the stream for virtually the whole day. So, there was a combination of pre-recorded videos and some ‘live’ speeches. Another issue was voting. We employed the company that used to do the voting electronically at our Annual Conference in the past, who were able to put in a process to enable voting to be done remotely. So that was a challenge we overcame,” says Magnus.
Watch NAHT president Ruth Davies’s speech below.
“A further logistical issue was ensuring that people could be piped in and out remotely at the right time while juggling that with people in the studio. And then there was the challenge of everyone’s internet connections – something that we, of course, did not have any control over.
“The whole experience was about trying to replicate as much as we possibly could of our Annual Conference, while acknowledging that, within the constraints of a virtual format, we were not going to be able to do everything.
SO, GIVEN ALL THAT, WERE THERE ANY POSITIVES LEARNT FROM THE EXPERIENCE?
“In some ways, it is a simpler thing to organise because you don’t have hotel bookings and all the periphery that happens in terms of dinners and things like that to sort. But then you don’t get the networking either, which is a drawback,” says Magnus.
“The other big possible advantage you get with a virtual conference, if you can make it work, is the ability to bring a lot more people together, even if not all of them have voting rights. So, potentially, you can extend engagement with the conference to a wider audience.
“When you have a conference at a venue, people have to give up days to come and observe. And although our AGM technically is open to all our members to come as visitors, most of those who do are voting delegates. What we found with this platform was it gave people the option to sign up, dip in and out, and see the conversations that were going on as a non-voting delegate.
“A virtual or remote conference does give at least the potential or possibility of bringing more people on board, particularly people who haven’t had the experience of Annual Conference before or who may be interested in getting involved in NAHT and want to see what it is all about. And then, hopefully, we can grow the activism in the union as a result. After all, Annual Conference is a showpiece for members,” says Magnus.
So, while the intention is very much to go back to a physical event next year, there is a recognition that, from the adversity of this year, there may be positives learnt for the future in terms of democratic engagement.
As Magnus emphasises: “I would anticipate the ambition will be that we go back to a face-to-face Annual Conference as soon as we safely can. But, certainly, the covid-19 situation has changed the way we can engage with members, and we have learnt from that.
“It has also enabled us to engage with other professions – for example, we’ve had members of the medical profession advising in the early days on how to open schools safely.
“Like for so many people around the country, this whole period has changed how we’ve been able – and had – to engage with members; arguably, it has been really beneficial in that respect.
“We’re not obviously going to lose the face-to-face branch or region meetings – and we hope we’ll be able to gather together physically once again in May next year. But, I do think there is a momentum there that we can learn from and build on from the experience of this year in terms of engagement with members, and vice versa,” says Magnus.
Catch up on all the events at Annual Conference 2020: www.naht.org.uk/annual-conference-2020
Built with Shorthand