Building alignment through dialogue
A school leader's guide to fostering cohesion
One of the challenges educational leaders face is fostering a cohesive vision of teaching and learning across their schools. Divergent perspectives among educators can lead to inconsistent practices, miscommunication, and fragmented efforts to improve student outcomes. To address this, educational leaders can draw upon insights from the interactive alignment model developed by psychologists Martin J. Pickering and Simon Garrod.
The interactive alignment model, originally proposed to explain how individuals achieve mutual understanding in dialogue, emphasizes that successful communication relies on the automatic alignment of mental representations between interlocutors. According to Pickering and Garrod, when people engage in conversation, they naturally align their linguistic representations—such as word choice, syntax, and semantics—through a process of priming. This alignment extends to deeper levels of understanding, including shared situation models or mental representations of the topic being discussed.
Applying this model to education, school leaders can leverage the principles of interactive alignment to cultivate a shared understanding of instructional practices among educators. By promoting regular, purposeful dialogues about teaching and learning, leaders can facilitate the natural alignment of educators' mental models. This alignment is not achieved through top-down mandates but emerges organically as educators engage in collaborative conversations, leading to more consistent and coherent instructional practices across the school.
Fostering alignment among educators
Central to the interactive alignment model is the idea that alignment occurs automatically through dialogue. When educators participate in meaningful discussions about their work, they unconsciously begin to use similar language, adopt common syntactic structures, and develop shared references. This linguistic alignment reflects and reinforces the alignment of their underlying mental representations of teaching and learning.
For educational leaders, creating opportunities for such dialogues is crucial. Professional learning communities (PLCs), collaborative planning sessions, and instructional rounds are examples of structures that facilitate regular conversations among educators. As teachers discuss lesson plans, share experiences, and reflect on student work, they begin to align not only in their language but also in their approaches to instruction and assessment.
Pickering and Garrod's research highlights that this alignment process is largely automatic and does not require deliberate effort to model others' mental states. Instead, it emerges naturally as a result of interactive communication. Educational leaders can, therefore, focus on fostering environments where open communication is encouraged, knowing that alignment will follow.
Developing shared mental models
As educators engage in ongoing dialogues, alignment progresses to deeper levels, resulting in shared situation models—comprehensive mental representations of educational concepts and practices. This means that teachers begin to interpret instructional strategies, curricular goals, and assessment methods in similar ways, leading to greater consistency in classroom practices.
The interactive alignment model suggests that alignment at one level (e.g., lexical choice) promotes alignment at other levels (e.g., syntactic structures, situation models). For schools, this implies that even starting with aligning terminology can eventually lead to a shared vision of effective teaching and learning. Sarah Cottinghatt writes well on these processes here:
Educational leaders can support this process by facilitating discussions that focus on core instructional concepts. For instance, delving into what "student-centered learning" or "formative assessment" truly means in practice can help educators build a common understanding. As teachers collaboratively interpret these concepts, their mental models align, leading to more cohesive implementation across classrooms.
For schools, this implies that even starting with aligning terminology can eventually lead to a shared vision of effective teaching and learning.
Overcoming misalignment through interactive repair
Despite the benefits of automatic alignment, misalignments and misunderstandings can occur. The interactive alignment model addresses this through the concept of interactive repair—a process where interlocutors identify and correct misalignments in real-time. In educational settings, this means that when teachers have differing interpretations or practices, they can engage in dialogues that surface these differences and collaboratively resolve them.
Educational leaders play a vital role in facilitating interactive repair. By creating a culture where open communication is valued and differences are seen as opportunities for growth, leaders encourage educators to address misalignments constructively. Structured protocols, such as critical friends groups or reflective dialogue practices, can provide safe spaces for teachers to discuss and align their practices.
Furthermore, recognizing that not all misalignments are immediately apparent, leaders can promote reflective practices that help educators become more aware of their own and others' perspectives. This heightened awareness supports the identification of subtle misalignments that, when addressed, can lead to stronger cohesion within the school.
Achieving sustainable improvement through alignment
Alignment among educators is not just about consistency—it is foundational for sustainable school improvement. When teachers share deep mental models of teaching and learning, they can collaborate more effectively, support each other's professional growth, and implement initiatives with greater fidelity.
Pickering and Garrod's interactive alignment model underscores the importance of alignment in achieving mutual understanding and coordinated action. For educational leaders, fostering alignment through dialogue ensures that improvement efforts are coherent and integrated. It reduces fragmentation and creates a unified approach to addressing student needs.
To maintain this alignment, leaders should embed dialogue and collaborative practices into the fabric of the school culture. Ongoing professional conversations, shared reflections, and collective problem-solving become regular features of the school environment. This continual process of alignment supports adaptability, as educators can more readily incorporate new ideas and respond to changing circumstances while maintaining a cohesive vision.
Harnessing the power of alignment
The interactive alignment model offers a valuable framework for educational leaders seeking to cultivate more aligned schools. By emphasizing the role of automatic alignment through dialogue, leaders can focus on creating conditions where meaningful communication thrives. This approach moves away from enforcing alignment through directives and instead relies on the natural human capacity for achieving mutual understanding.
In practice, this means prioritizing time and space for educators to engage in deep conversations about their work. It involves fostering a culture of openness, collaboration, and continuous learning. As educators align their mental models, they build a strong foundation for consistent and effective practices that support student learning.
Ultimately, the interactive alignment model highlights that alignment is not a one-time achievement but an ongoing process. By continually engaging in dialogue, educators and leaders together create schools that are not only aligned but also dynamic, responsive, and united in their commitment to excellence in teaching and learning.
Reference
Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2004). The interactive-alignment model: Developments and refinements. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27(2), 212-225.
Note: I use LLMs to augment my work. Email me at naquin.rod@gmail.com for more information.