- Get link
- X
- Other Apps
For so many
generations, men strived to acquire competencies and relevant information
without using the scientific skills or education and without passing through
the scientific procedures. This process of gaining knowledge by means of
natural methods based on gift came to be known as common sense. Today however,
the most common and reliable method of acquiring this kind of knowledge is
through scientific research. These two methods have got some differences and
similarities in terms of procedures of collecting information and analysing it
in order to get to the new knowledge of the situation in the environment.
Common sense
"Common
sense" has evolved in time in terms of its philosophical meanings and
terminology. It was first defined by a Greek philosopher, Aristotle as a
capability of the animal soul (Greek psukhē)
which enables different individual senses to collectively perceive
characteristics such as movement and size, which are common to all things, and
which help people and other animals to distinguish and identify things. It is distinct from basic sensory perception and from human
rational thinking, but works with both.
 |
| Common Sense |
Bridgeman
(2012),
defines
common sense as “sound and prudent judgment based on a simple perception of the situation or facts,” but common sense is often based on relatively narrow and simplistic assumptions about the world, as well as prejudice, which can lead to erroneous conclusions. Common sense is a
basic ability to perceive, understand, and judge things, which is shared by
("common to") nearly all people, and can be reasonably expected of
nearly all people without any need for debate. "Good sense" is
sometimes seen as equivalent to "common sense", and sometimes not.
Redekop (2009)
defines the common sense as the untutored cognitions, intuitions, or mental
instincts that are elicited in the course of everyday experience, and help to
structure our experience. The common sense comes
“as the
result of innate, hardwired mental mechanisms that produce the ―self-evident
truths that all healthy human beings perceive just by being in the world –
things like the existence of external objects that persist even when we are not
observing them, the existence of causal relations between observed events, the
existence of human responsibility and intention, basic moral intuitions, an
―instinct for language and basic numerical properties, certain logical
inferences, and much more” (p. 3).
However, the definition which seems to be more practical as far as
educational psychology and the classroom situation are concerned is given by
the Oxford dictionary which defines the common sense as “the ability to think about things in a practical way and make sensible
decisions” (Hornby, 2010: 243). This
implies that the common sense can help people or professionals such as teachers
to take the correct decision in their daily activities.
Strength of common
sense is in that, it is involved in any decision making and there is no single
appropriate decision which does not require the use of common sense (Smith,
2007). The common sense develops at the early age of life in humans and
constitutes the foundation of most decisions we make. Besides this people tend
to be very sure and confident of what they do if they are result of their
common sense as Redekop (2009) emphasises to say: “… as Reid was at pains to show, empirical analysis of our mental
operations reveals that we do in fact rely on a variety of ―principles of
common sense that cannot be proven but without which we would not be able to
make sense of anything at all” (p7).
However, the common sense has its limits in that it
uses the intuition and people perceive it as true facts or truth itself while
further research on its facts sometimes reveals the opposite to it. This is in
line with Bridgeman (2012) statement saying that“… but much of what goes as common sense is actually based
on common misunderstandings, urban legends, or outright nonsense”(p.1).
Moreover, According to Bridgeman (2012) even if common sense can be regarded as “sound and prudent
judgment based on a simple perception of the situation or facts,” it is often
based on relatively narrow and simplistic assumptions about the world, as well
as prejudice, which can lead to erroneous conclusions. Apart from this, like
Redekop (2009) points it out, going back to the ideas of Locke and others
thinkers concerning the commons sense in the sceptical tradition they were
worried about the way in which recourse to these innate ideas could easily lead
to dogmatism and error. This means that common sense alone cannot be relied
upon in all the decisions made about different situations or else we may be
exposed to numerous unnecessary mistakes. For this reason it becomes inevitable
to explore other tools that can be used as a basis of the decision to be taken
in a given profession.
Research
Research, according to Kombo and Tromp (2006) is all about
looking for, examining, exploring and exploring a situation. The research in
this regard must be systematic, objective, based on the empirical evidence and
carefully designed.
Kasonde (2013) defines research as a process of seeking
information with aim of finding solution to a certain problem. This involves a
careful interpretation based on scientific theory, the views of the research
participants or personal experience of daily life.
This means that research can be regarded as a systematic
way of finding the reality of the situation in order to find a solution to a
problem. Research is very important in every day’s teaching activities and can
be done in different ways. The information needed by a researcher, in
educational psychology domain, may concern the schools, teachers or students or
their interaction with the school environment and various approaches, which,
when used with precaution, yield the needed results for the smooth going of the
teacher’s or educational researcher’s activities. The approaches can include
experiments, correlation studies and descriptive researches (Slavin, 2006).
However in classroom situation, being a complex environment with
different individuals from different backgrounds and where some decisions are
immediately required, sometimes the teacher does not have enough time for a
systematic research. They need to find an alternative way or approach to get
the information and interpret it in order to come up with a tangible solution
as confirmed in the statement below.
“Teachers who are intentional, critical
thinkers are likely to enter their classrooms equipped with knowledge about
research in educational psychology. Every year, educational psychologists
discover or refine principles of teaching and learning that are useful for
practicing teachers. Some of these principles are just common sense backed up
with evidence, but others are more surprising. One problem educational
psychologist’s face is that almost everyone thinks he or she is an expert on
the subject of educational psychology. Most adults have spent many years in
schools watching what teachers do. Add to that a certain amount of knowledge of
human nature, and voila!
Everyone is an amateur educational psychologist” (Slavin, 2006: 9).
It is in this regard that the common sense
comes to play a very important role in the classroom-based decision making.
The relationship
between research and common sense
The
goals of research and common sense are different. Common sense is mainly
concerned with immediate action in context; research is mainly concerned with
achieving some understanding which - to some extent - is independent of persons
and context, and in this interest may eschew the need for guiding immediate
action.
Research relies more on extensive collaborative and competitive work towards
unarguable agreement. Common sense is certainly collaborative (even
collusive), but when differences arise, agreements to differ are common. In the
common sense world, persons think as they do; in the scientific research
world for example, knowledge is what it currently is.
If we would however only depend on our common sense, such as experience
or general knowledge, rather than on scientific research and statistics in
psychology, the likelihood of falsifying our results presumably influencing our
hypothesis is to a large extent. As no data or facts are available the results
of the hypothesis are based merely on assumptions rather than on analysed
research studies, therefore being biased as it is entirely opinion based.
Nevertheless one might argue that having an opinion based result is the goal of
research due to the fact that at the end of the research one supports his or
her thesis with an opinion.
The difference between an opinion on results taking from research or from common sense would be that research allows an objective perspective whereas common sense is influenced by different factors such as personality, mood, external influences, etc. hence being subjective. It is not said that scientific research is flawless as experiments or tests could also be flawed through external or internal influences such as participants taking part, wrong application of scientific instruments, wrong evaluation of data, etc.
But in comparison to common sense, the research based opinion does not
limit our knowledge but rather widens it as many things are still unclear. Our
common sense is limited to the outskirts of our knowledge as we retrieve it
from our personal experience rather than newly obtained facts. Overall
scientific research and statistics is essential in developing a balanced
overview and opinion of the results in order to prove a hypothesis. It is less
subjective and is more reliable than common sense as the influences in
experiments can be controlled in a controlled environment whereas external
influences, false judgement, etc. is able to entirely falsify common sense (Lefeza,
The
common sense and research can be used together to produce better and more
reliable result that either of them alone. Slavin ( 2006) points out that As
the case of Mr. Harris illustrates, no theory, no research, no book can tell
teachers what to do in a given situation. Making the right decisions depends on
the context within which the problem arises, the objectives the teacher has in
mind, and many other factors, all of which must be assessed in the light of
educated common sense. For example, research in mathematics instruction usually
finds that a rapid pace of instruction increases achievement. Yet a teacher may quite legitimately slow down and spend
a lot of time on a concept that is particularly critical or may let students
tale time to discover a mathematical principle on their own.
It
is usually much more efficient (that is, it takes less time) to teach students
skills or information directly than it is to let them make discoveries for
themselves; but if the teacher wants students to gain a deeper understanding of
a topic or to know how to find information or figure things out for themselves,
then the research findings about pace can be temporarily shelved. “The point is that while research in
educational psychology can sometimes be translated directly to the classroom,
it is best to apply the principles with a hefty dose of common sense and a
clear view of what is being taught to whom and for what purpose” (p. 44).
In
the interests of knowledge, scientific research for example tries to go behind
things as they seem. To detect, control and understand the behaviour of
entities, it creates artificial events (experiments) so as to isolate the
effects of various entities. For this reason, experiments are, from the
everyday point of view, thoroughly impractical. They work only in contrived
circumstances. Common sense is more concerned with coping with things as
they are, in all their awkward combinations.
The worth of research
in decision making over the use of common sense
Why do many psychologists prefer research to common
sense? In answering the outlined question it is prudent to look at the
suggested reasons below.
First, a research which leads to theories generation tends to be more
internally consistent than common sense. That is, a theory usually doesn’t
contradict itself. Common sense, on the other hand, often contradicts itself
(“absence makes the heart grow fonder,” but “out of sight, out of mind”).
Researchers find it easier to make clear, consistent predictions from a
consistent theory rather than from inconsistent common sense (Bhaskar, 1989 and
Collins, 1992)
Second, researches which generate theories tend to be more consistent
with existing facts than common sense. Often, theories are constructed by
systematically collecting data and carefully analysing the data for patterns.
But even when facts do not play a dominant role in giving birth to a theory,
facts will usually shape the theory’s development. Generally, if deductions
from a theory are incorrect, the theory will be changed or abandoned. Thus,
unlike common sense, theories do not ignore facts. Consequently, a hypothesis
based on an established theory is a more educated guess and should have a
greater chance of being correct than one based on common sense (Bhaskar, 1989
and Collins, 1992)
Third, researches are not restricted to making common sense or intuitively obvious predictions. Conducting research generate theories that can make predictions that are counter-intuitive. For example, social learning theory predicts that rewarding a child for a behaviour could make the child like doing the behaviour less (because the child may decide that he or she does the behaviour because of the reward, rather than because the child likes it).
Because theories are not limited to making predictions that are
consistent with common sense, a theory may suggest controversial, new ways of
viewing the world. For instance, Darwin’s theory of evolution had us look at
apes as relatives, Einstein’s theory of relativity had us look at matter and
energy as being the same thing, Freud’s theory had us look at ourselves as
being motivated by forces of which we weren’t aware, and Watson’s theory had us
look at ourselves as a set of reflexes.
Fourth, research summarises and organises a great deal of information.
Just as the plot of a movie may connect thousands of otherwise unrelated
images, research connect individual facts and give them meaning. That is,
research tries to explain facts. The ability of theories to connect facts means
that for example theory-based research will not produce isolated bits of
trivia. Instead, the findings will fit into a framework that connects many
other studies. In other words, the facts revealed by theory-based research are
not merely of interest for their own sake, but also for how they relate to the
theory’s explanation of how the world works.
Fifth, research gives to individual facts a meaningful context, contrary
to common sense theories focus research. Because many researchers try to test
theories, findings from theory-based research are not only relevant to the
theory’s explanation of events, but also to the findings of other researchers.
Because progress in scientific research for example comes from researchers
building on each other’s work, the importance of a theory’s ability to
coordinate individual scientists’ efforts should not be underestimated.
Sixth, research conducting is often broad in scope. Because it can be
applied to a wide range of situations, researchers can generate a wide variety
of studies from a single theory. For example, social learning theory can be
applied to prisons, businesses, advertising, politics, schizophrenics, smokers,
librarians, mad dogs, and Englishmen. Similarly, Freud’s theory of the unconscious
can be applied to virtually any situation while common sense can likely only to
be applied to very few situations.
Common sense is mostly based on opinions, maybe individualistic or
naturalistic, lack objectivity and sometimes does not carry notions of being
factual. Examples could include:
Ø
People marry because they love each other vs. people
marry because it is a social expectation
Ø
People are unemployed because they are lazy and don’t
want to work vs. the structure of employment has changed
Ø
People are poor because they do not budget properly
vs. people are poor because of low wages and low benefits
Ø
People commit suicides because they are unhappy vs.
rates of suicide are socially distributed and can be attributed to social
factors such as unemployment, religion, and urbanisation.
Finally, research generate theories which are often more testable than
common sense. That is, by talking about variables that can be objectively
measured and by making specific predictions; a good theory is easy to test. As
exemplified above unlike use of common sense, research is a very useful tool
for developing ideas that are used in decision making and tying those ideas to
existing knowledge. Without research based on theory, psychology would
chaotically move in every direction with little purpose, like a chicken with
its head cut off. Indeed, theory-based research is responsible for much of
psychology’s progress which guides our sound decision in the education system.
CONCLUSION
Common sense and research, both involve an attempt to understand various
aspects of educational been before a teacher makes decisions. However before a
decision is made, research, but arguably not common sense, involves an
explicit, systematic approach to finding things out, often through a process of
testing out preconceptions. In another angle it could be argued that both
research and common sense rely on fundamentally concrete modes of thought.
Reasoning is done with imagined entities and events, but imagined entity of
researched works turned to be different from those of common sense. Both
research and common sense share, or at least so suppose, the same common
ontology of space, time, object, and action (that is, the same basic dimensions
of thought). But they use them differently, and attribute entities and events
different to them.
REFERENCES
Abelson R, Lalljee M (1988) 'Knowledge structures and
causal explanation' in Hilton D J (Ed) Contemporary Science and Natural
Explanation Harvester Press: Sussex
Bhaskar R (1989) Reclaiming
Reality Verso: London
Bridgeman,B.(2012). Why Bother with Research
When We Have Common Sense?, R & D Connections, no 20. Princeton: ETS
Research & Development
Collins
H (1992) Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice
Chicago University
Press: Chicago
Dembo Myron H
(1994). Applying Educational Psychology
5th Ed University of Southen Africa. California
Fuller,A.(2011). The Teacher as a Decision Maker/Pearson «
Le sens commun », Sophia Rosenfeld. Christophe Jaquet (trad.)ISBN
978-2-7535-2861-1 Presses universitaires
Gephart, R. P. Jr. (1993), The textual approach: risk
and blame in disaster sense-making, Academy
of Management Journal, Vol. 36, No. 6, pp. 1400-29.
Gioia,
D.A. and Chittipeddi, K. (1991), Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change
initiation, Strategic Management Journal,
Vol. 12, pp. 433-448.
Gregoric,
P. (2007). Aristotle on the common sense.
New York: Oxford University press
Hasan,
H. and Gould, E. (2001), Support for the sense-making activity of managers, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 31, No.
1, pp. 71-86.
Hornby,
A.S. (2010). Oxford learner’s dictionary.
8th edition. New York: Oxford University press
Kreuger
RA (2000) 3rd edition Focus Groups: A Practical Guide For Applied
Research (2nd Edition).
London, Sage.
lefezaScientific
Research and Common Sense. Available at : http://lefeza.wordpress.com/2011/09/29/scientific-research-and-common-sense/retrieved
on 12/04/2014
McMahon Judith W,
McMahon Frank B, and Romano (1995) Psychology and You. Second EditionWest
Publishing Company, New York.
Redekop, B. W. (2009),Common Sense in Philosophical and Scientific Perspective. Management Decision, Vol. 47, No. 3, pp. 399-412. Virginia: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
http://www.ask.com/question/why-is-research-better-than-common-sense date retrieved 15/05/14
Comments
Post a Comment