Common-sense, shaped by our daily experiences and cultural norms, often feels like a trustworthy guide. It simplifies decisions and provides a sense of clarity in navigating the world. But when it comes to addressing complex challenges—particularly in education—common-sense often falters. In this discussion, we’ll delve into why common-sense so often gets things wrong, particularly in education, and how scientific evidence has challenged some deeply held assumptions about learning and student well-being.

Why Common-sense Isn’t Always Reliable

At its heart, common-sense relies on heuristics, the mental shortcuts we use to make quick decisions. These shortcuts, while useful in routine situations, often oversimplify reality and leave us vulnerable to errors. For instance, cognitive biases like confirmation bias lead us to favour information that aligns with our pre-existing beliefs while ignoring evidence that contradicts them. Similarly, common-sense thrives on anecdotal evidence—personal experiences that we generalize into universal truths.

What’s more, common-sense resists complexity. It favours easy, intuitive explanations over nuanced realities. But education, like many fields, is inherently complex. It involves layers of psychological, social, and environmental factors that simple intuition can’t adequately capture. This is where research becomes essential: it tests our assumptions, often uncovering truths that defy our instincts.

The Clash of Common-sense and Science in Education

Education is filled with examples of common-sense assumptions that crumble under scientific scrutiny. Two areas where this conflict is particularly evident are learning strategies and anti-bullying approaches.

Cramming vs. Spaced Learning: A Counterintuitive Truth

A classic example of common-sense in education is the belief that cramming—studying intensively just before a test—is the most efficient way to prepare. Many students swear by this method, convinced that concentrating their efforts into a single burst of study yields the best results. The logic seems straightforward: if you immerse yourself in the material, you’ll retain it for the test.

However, decades of research in cognitive psychology tell a different story. Spaced learning—reviewing material over multiple sessions with intervals in between—consistently outperforms cramming. This approach works because it strengthens memory through repeated retrieval and combats the natural process of forgetting. The benefits of spaced learning were first documented in the late 19th century by Hermann Ebbinghaus, who demonstrated the "forgetting curve." Modern studies have since confirmed its effectiveness across diverse subjects and age groups.

Yet, spaced learning often feels counterintuitive. Cramming provides an immediate sense of progress, making students feel like they’ve accomplished something significant. In contrast, spaced learning demands more planning, effort, and patience—qualities that don’t align with the urgency students feel before a test. But the evidence is clear: while cramming might help in the short term, spaced learning leads to deeper, more durable understanding.

Anti-Bullying Strategies: The Limits of Punishment

When it comes to bullying, common-sense suggests a straightforward solution: punish the bullies and teach victims to stand up for themselves. These ideas resonate because they align with our sense of justice and fairness. However, research reveals that such approaches often backfire.

Punitive measures, for example, can exacerbate the problem. Studies show that harsh punishments can increase aggression and alienation in bullies, making them more likely to reoffend. Similarly, expecting victims to confront their bullies can place an unfair burden on them, often worsening their feelings of vulnerability.

Instead, effective anti-bullying strategies focus on systemic change. Programs like Finland's KiVa initiative emphasize the role of bystanders—students who witness bullying—in fostering a supportive school culture. By empowering peers to intervene and promoting collective responsibility, these programs have significantly reduced bullying rates. Another evidence-based approach involves teaching bullies empathy and social skills, addressing the root causes of their behavior rather than simply punishing them.

These findings challenge our instincts. Punishment and confrontation feel satisfying because they appear to deliver justice. But in reality, lasting solutions require understanding the social dynamics and psychological factors that drive bullying.

Beyond Common-sense: Other Misguided Beliefs in Education

The tension between intuition and evidence extends far beyond cramming and anti-bullying campaigns. Consider these other widespread misconceptions:

• The Learning Styles Myth: Many believe students learn best when taught in their preferred style—visual, auditory, or kinesthetic. It seems logical: tailor the method to the individual, and learning will improve. Yet research has repeatedly debunked this idea, showing that teaching methods engaging multiple senses and encouraging active participation are universally more effective.

• Homework Overload: Another common-sense belief is that more homework leads to better academic performance. While some homework is beneficial, excessive assignments can cause stress, burnout, and disengagement, especially in younger students. Studies consistently show that the quality of homework matters far more than the quantity.

• The Self-Esteem Movement: For decades, educators and parents have emphasized building students' self-esteem through constant praise. But research reveals that unwarranted praise can undermine motivation and resilience. A more effective approach is fostering a growth mindset—helping students view challenges as opportunities for growth and learning.

Why Do We Cling to Common-sense?

Despite mounting evidence, common-sense beliefs persist. One reason is that they feel emotionally satisfying. Punishing a bully or praising a struggling student offers an immediate sense of resolution. Additionally, societal norms reinforce these ideas, making them deeply ingrained and resistant to change. Confirmation bias further complicates matters: we’re more likely to notice examples that support our beliefs and ignore those that contradict them.

Embracing Evidence-Based Practices

The reliance on common-sense in education is not just a theoretical issue; it has real consequences. Punitive anti-bullying strategies can worsen the problem. Over-praising students can lead to fragile self-esteem. Cramming results in shallow learning. To avoid these pitfalls, educators, policymakers, and parents must turn to evidence-based practices.

This means creating awareness about the limits of intuition, equipping educators with tools to implement proven strategies, and fostering a culture of critical thinking in schools. For example, schools can adopt spaced learning techniques, promote social-emotional learning programs, and implement peer-based anti-bullying initiatives. Ongoing research is also vital, as it refines our understanding and ensures that strategies remain effective in diverse contexts.

Simply Put

Common-sense has its place in our daily lives, but when applied to education, it often oversimplifies and misleads. Scientific research offers us a clearer path, one that challenges intuition and provides better outcomes. The next time a common-sense idea feels right, it’s worth asking: What does the evidence say? By questioning intuition and embracing evidence, we can create a more effective and equitable education system—one that truly serves students and society alike.

References

1. Ebbinghaus, H. (1885/1913). Memory: A Contribution to Experimental Psychology. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

2. Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354–380.

3. Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York: Random House.

4. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. London: Routledge.

5. Kärnä, A., Voeten, M., Little, T. D., Poskiparta, E., Kaljonen, A., & Salmivalli, C. (2011). A large-scale evaluation of the KiVa antibullying program: Grades 4–6. Child Development, 82(1), 311–330.

6. Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J., Ruscio, J., & Beyerstein, B. L. (2010). 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology: Shattering Widespread Misconceptions about Human Behavior. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

7. Cooper, H., Robinson, J. C., & Patall, E. A. (2006). Does homework improve academic achievement? A synthesis of research, 1987–2003. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 1–62.

8. Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at School: What We Know and What We Can Do. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

9. Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (2011). Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. In Psychology and the Real World: Essays Illustrating Fundamental Contributions to Society. Worth Publishers.

10. Slavin, R. E. (1987). Cooperative learning: Where behavioral and humanistic approaches to classroom motivation meet. Elementary School Journal, 88(1), 29–37.