University Of Dallas
David R. Seibold and Paul Kang’s “Using Critical Praxis To Understand and Teach Teamwork” is driven by a logical appeal by using various articles and readings in order to point out the gaps between the academic teaching and theories of teamwork and the actual practice of teamwork. This can be seen as they used supporting research to indicate the discrepancies between the different teambuilding concepts as they explain both the predominant and less obvious approaches in understanding the concept of teamwork.
The authors present the concept of critical praxis on teamwork by using Seibold 's research to suggest the importance of critical praxis which is referring to the process of learning how to work within a team environment. “The predominant approach to redressing teamwork problems is to suggest that managers and team members themselves acquire alternate tools/strategies to foster teamwork,” says Seibold. This means that if the first the first idea that was used in order to solve a problem within the conflicts of a team, go to the next idea and if that doesn’t work, try another idea until you are able to resolve the issue. This is what the authors used as a basis for the idea of using critical reasoning to understand teamwork. The authors article uses illustrations to provide proof of how the concept of teamwork is unaligned from the actual experience of teamwork by providing similar works explaining the concept of critical praxis and its use. It list consciousness and possibilities of aligning the concepts but seem to lack evidence of how critical praxis was used and is being used in teamwork.
In the end, I believe that the authors did a great job in making their argument. I believe that teamwork is something that takes dedication and commitment from each person from within the team. I agree with the premise in relation to the...