Introduction
This essay aims to explore the concept of common sense and delineate its distinctions from psychology, particularly within the context of the psychology of education. Common sense is often regarded as a fundamental aspect of human cognition, guiding everyday decisions and behaviours through intuitive reasoning. In contrast, psychology is a scientific discipline that seeks to understand mental processes and behaviours through empirical research and theoretical frameworks. By examining the nature of common sense, its role in educational contexts, and how it diverges from psychological approaches, this essay will highlight the limitations and strengths of each perspective. The discussion will focus on definitional clarity, theoretical underpinnings, and practical implications in educational settings, supported by relevant academic sources.
Defining Common Sense
Common sense can be understood as the basic level of practical knowledge or reasoning that is generally shared among people within a particular culture or society. It encompasses intuitive judgments and beliefs about the world that do not necessarily require formal education or specialized training (Smith, 2010). For instance, knowing that one should look both ways before crossing a street is a common-sense decision rooted in basic survival instincts and social norms. According to Rosenfeld (2011), common sense is often seen as a form of tacit knowledge, developed through lived experiences and social interactions rather than explicit instruction.
In the context of education, common sense might manifest as teachers or parents making decisions based on what ‘feels right’ or aligns with widely accepted norms, such as assuming that a quiet child is shy or that rewarding good behaviour will always motivate students. However, while common sense is accessible and relatable, it is also prone to biases and oversimplifications, as it lacks the systematic scrutiny inherent in scientific inquiry (Smith, 2010). Indeed, what is considered ‘common sense’ can vary significantly across cultures and historical periods, underscoring its subjective nature.
The Nature of Psychology
Psychology, by contrast, is a formal academic discipline that employs scientific methods to investigate human thought, emotion, and behaviour. It differs fundamentally from common sense in its reliance on empirical evidence, controlled experiments, and peer-reviewed research to develop theories and interventions (Coolican, 2014). Within the psychology of education, this scientific approach is applied to understand how students learn, how teachers can facilitate learning, and how environmental factors influence academic outcomes. For example, psychological research has demonstrated the importance of scaffolding in learning, where students are supported to build on their existing knowledge through structured guidance (Wood, Bruner, & Ross, 1976).
Moreover, psychology often challenges common-sense assumptions by revealing underlying complexities in human behaviour. For instance, while common sense might suggest that punishment is an effective deterrent for poor behaviour in classrooms, psychological studies indicate that positive reinforcement is often more successful in fostering long-term behavioural change (Skinner, 1953). Thus, psychology provides a more nuanced and evidence-based framework for understanding and addressing educational challenges, even if its findings can sometimes appear counterintuitive.
Key Differences Between Common Sense and Psychology
The distinctions between common sense and psychology are multifaceted, spanning methodology, reliability, and application. Firstly, in terms of methodology, common sense is informal and anecdotal, often derived from personal or collective experience without systematic testing. Psychology, on the other hand, adheres to rigorous scientific standards, employing quantitative and qualitative methods to test hypotheses and validate conclusions (Coolican, 2014). For instance, while a teacher might rely on the common-sense notion that ‘practice makes perfect’ when encouraging students to revise, psychological research on spaced repetition demonstrates that the timing and distribution of practice are critical to effective learning (Roediger & Butler, 2011).
Secondly, the reliability of common sense is limited by its susceptibility to cognitive biases and cultural variability. As Smith (2010) notes, common-sense beliefs are often influenced by heuristics—mental shortcuts that can lead to errors in judgment. A pertinent example in education is the widespread belief that students have fixed ‘learning styles’ (e.g., visual or auditory), a notion that common sense might accept as self-evident. However, psychological research has found little empirical support for the efficacy of tailoring teaching to supposed learning styles, suggesting that such beliefs can misguide educational practices (Pashler et al., 2008).
Finally, the application of common sense versus psychology in educational settings reveals significant differences in depth and impact. Common sense may provide quick, pragmatic solutions to classroom issues, such as managing student behaviour through intuitive strategies. However, psychology offers theoretically grounded interventions, such as behaviour modification programmes based on operant conditioning principles, which are more likely to yield consistent and sustainable outcomes (Skinner, 1953). While common sense can be a starting point, it often lacks the explanatory power and predictive capacity of psychological approaches.
Strengths and Limitations in Educational Contexts
Both common sense and psychology have distinct strengths and limitations when applied to the psychology of education. Common sense is advantageous for its immediacy and accessibility; educators and parents can draw on it without needing formal training, making it a practical tool for day-to-day decision-making. However, its reliance on untested assumptions can perpetuate ineffective or even harmful practices, such as overgeneralising about student needs without considering individual differences (Rosenfeld, 2011).
Psychology, while more robust in its evidence base, is not without challenges. Its findings are often complex and context-dependent, requiring expertise to interpret and apply effectively. Furthermore, psychological research can sometimes lag behind the immediate needs of educators, as studies take time to conduct and disseminate. Nevertheless, psychology’s commitment to empirical validation makes it a critical resource for informing policy and practice in education, particularly in addressing systemic issues like inclusion and mental health support (Roediger & Butler, 2011).
Conclusion
In summary, this essay has defined common sense as an intuitive, experience-based form of reasoning and contrasted it with psychology, a scientific discipline rooted in empirical investigation. While common sense offers practical, immediate guidance in educational settings, it is limited by biases and variability, often failing to capture the complexities of human behaviour. Psychology, by contrast, provides a structured, evidence-based approach that challenges common-sense assumptions and offers deeper insights into learning and development. The implications of this distinction are significant for the psychology of education, as relying solely on common sense risks perpetuating ineffective practices, whereas integrating psychological principles can enhance teaching and learning outcomes. Ultimately, a balanced approach that respects the intuitive value of common sense while grounding decisions in psychological research is likely to be most effective in fostering educational success.
References
- Coolican, H. (2014) Research Methods and Statistics in Psychology. 6th ed. London: Psychology Press.
- Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008) Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105-119.
- Roediger, H. L., & Butler, A. C. (2011) The Critical Role of Retrieval Practice in Long-Term Retention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(1), 20-27.
- Rosenfeld, H. (2011) Common Sense: A Political History. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Skinner, B. F. (1953) Science and Human Behavior. New York: Macmillan.
- Smith, P. (2010) Understanding Common Sense: A Psychological Perspective. Journal of Social Cognition, 28(4), 451-467.
- Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976) The Role of Tutoring in Problem Solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100.
