“If You Can’t Drive, Ride Shotgun: A Student Guide to Survival” by Tyrone Behari Jnr

In order to complete driver’s education, students must not only learn the traffic code to pass a written theory exam, but in addition, they have to display practical driving proficiency and exhibit proof of their skills to pass a road test.  In order to prepare for this, in-car driving lessons are taken where the student is either driving, or in the front passenger seat (shotgun) observing the instructor drive.  One place a student is never situated is in a backseat of the car.

Typically, people would say that they are endeavoring to “learn how to drive,” as opposed to phrasing it perhaps more simply as trying to “get a driver’s license.”  Where the education industry is concerned, it would appear that things are quite the contrary—“students educate themselves in pursuit of a degree instead of in the pursuit of learning” (Parker par. 2).  Different to an aspiring driver, a student is likely to say that they are going to “get a degree,” as opposed to “learn how to be a [insert desired profession here].”  Herein, we discover the problem where career training within the education industry is concerned: there is a backseat, passenger culture. 

It has become increasingly common for students to simply recycle, regurgitate and reproduce information that they are given in class onto assignments and exams simply to meet a pass grade and obtain their bachelor’s degree.  The professor drives the metaphorical car (teaching the class), while students stay in the backseat and simply wait to arrive at the end of the journey (course).  There is little to no chance for the student to show gumption; they assume the role of a nodding dog car accessory.  As students, it makes little sense to simply go from A to B.  “You do not play a sonata in order to reach the final chord, and if the meanings of things were simply in ends, composers would write nothing but finales” (Watts).  Good musicians ought to understand the journey of the music; otherwise, they will never truly appreciate or fully comprehend the beauty of the final sound.  Likewise, an ideal student should not simply try to pass exams and make good papers.  They should go through a myriad of other benefitting experiences along the way, such as further reading and group discussion, which help shape submitted work even if not directly referenced.  With every assignment, there is great insight to be grasped along the way.  Students should dread being like receptacles, having a brain filled to capacity yet not possessing genuine understanding (Freire). 

Typically, the professor is put upon a figurative pedestal, where the classroom is their court, and they are the judge and jury.  They adopt the role of the Big Chief, while also being lucky enough to simultaneously hold the position of Dean of Discipline (Gordon).  The paternalism that ran colonialism, runs the classroom (Freire).  Once within such an environment, the easiest option is to submit.  Herein, the student is fully immersed within the “edu-cage-tion machine” (Brookes); trapped, sentenced until the end of the semester.  Correction---the subsequent semesters will only have difference chiefs---the student is sentenced until graduation. 

Where grading is concerned, the bell curve system of which most professors follow, immediately limits students, shackles and all.  Why is the system so intent on having the majority of students tacitly labelled “average,” simply one of the crowd, hovering between a B and C- grade? Why can’t there be more than, say, five A grades in a class?  Surely, such an environment would be indispensable and much more beneficial at large.  Just picture classmates universally working with one another as they know that they can all receive an A if it is deserved.  Collaboration would be encouraged, and that only pays dividends due to the fact that an individual’s horizons are broadened when working with peers.  One’s empathy would be encouraged, which can only be a good thing due to the strength that possessing people skills and moral development holds within education. 

In Roksa and Arum’s “Life After College,” a study found that students who had substantial levels of peer-to-peer interaction while at college adjusted into vocational life with greater ease (Roksa and Arum).  It is said that 80-85% of career success is dependent on social (soft) skills, while only 15-20% is dependent on technical (hard) skills.  Lawrence Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development shows that there is a strong relationship between moral development and level of education (Kohlberg).  It would appear that the education industry as a whole currently falls within a pre-conventional morality (namely due to self-interest orientation).  According to Kohlberg, this stage should be outgrown during childhood!  With an empathetic, peer-orientated style of learning, students would rise from a pre-conventional morality, leapfrog a conventional morality, and achieve the most advanced stage of development under a post-conventional morality: universal ethics orientation.  Under this mindset, students would take a different approach to intelligent input from peers.  The competitive, “I don’t understand, so I must be stupid” mentality would be put aside for a self-enlightening echo of “I feel smart, as I had to stretch myself to comprehend” (Shah).

Under the professor-concentrated style of learning, the student is in the backseat.  A peer orientated style of learning brings the student into shotgun.  Feedback learning encourages the student to be an agent of change.  As humans, we should embrace this.  96% of our DNA is shared with chimpanzees; the difference is less than that between mice and rats (“Chimps, Humans 96 Percent the Same, Gene Study Finds”).  One of the principal characteristics that sets us apart as a more intelligent species is our opposable thumbs, the attribute ability of the precision grip.  We were made to be adaptable.

The adaptable nature of humans should be naturally complimented by college.  The word education is derived from mid-16^th century Latin and the word educāre: to train or to mold.  By definition of its origin, education should be exercising and developing students’ minds.  A good example of this taking place is in the class I write this very essay for.  Our professor, Paul Kirpal Gordon, emphasized from the very first day that we need to develop ourselves within the KP Trident (as a thinker, reader, and writer).  However, throughout the industry this is not always the case.  “So what is the solution?” I hear you ask.  My answer is work—occupational experience, namely internships and work-study programs.   

Occupational experiences are a gateway to endless opportunities.  Schools should actively encourage and help students to seek out opportunities, or even go as far as making sure that all students acquire work experience within their desired field by the time they graduate.  At the workplace, students get the opportunity to meet people living the life they wish to live (Gordon), as well as having the chance to apply their developed skills to the “real world.”  Similar to the peer-to-peer relationship at college, relationships with extremely valuable dialogue can be developed in the professional world.  Mentorship is the ultimate career training from the front seat (Goodman).  One college that is particularly following my suggested modus operandi is the University of Chicago.  The Jeff Metcalf Internship Program provides a $4,000 grant for a 10 week period, if an employer cannot afford to hire interns at the local minimum wage (“When Internships Don’t Pay, Some Colleges Will”).  Clearly, this school sees the value that I do when it comes to occupational experiences.    

We must be mindful how we go about changes to the education industry.  “Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose” (Karr).  The more things change, the more they stay the same.  Especially in the current political climate, radical desires will not be attended to.  They will ultimately not affect reality.  As with most matters, we need a progressive approach to help adjust the status quo.  For now, on the individual level, students should be proactive.  If you can’t drive, ride shotgun…just please do not get into the backseat.

Works Cited

Arum, Richard, and Roksa, Josipa. “Life after College: The Challenging Transitions of the Academically Adrift Cohort.” Change Magazine, June 19, 2012

Brookes, Samantha. “Rusted Gears: My Triumph over the American Education Factory.” Taking Giant Steps, June 29, 2016. http://giantstepspress.blogspot.com/2016/06/rusted-gears-my-triumph-over  american.html. Accessed November 11, 2017.

Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 30^th Anniversary edition, Bloomsbury Academic, 2000

Goodman, Hannah. “Career Development for Undergraduates: A Genius-Bar Idea”. Taking Giant Steps, January 15, 2017.        http://giantstepspress.blogspot.com/2017/01/career    development-for undergraduates.html. Accessed November 11, 2017.

Gordon, Paul Kirpal. WSC 001 class discussion. Hofstra, October 26, 2017.

Hartocollis, Anemona. “When Internships Don’t Pay, Some Colleges Will”. The New York Times. Nov 2, 2017.

Karr, Jean-Baptiste A. Les Guêpes.  Journal, January 1949.

Kohlberg, Lawrence. Lawrence Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development. 2012.

Lovgren, Stefan. “Chimps, Humands 96 Percent the Same, Gene Study Finds”. National   Geographic News. August 31, 2005.

Parker, Morgan. Do Not Pass Graduation, Do Not Collect $200,000 Degree. 2015.

Shah, Ria. “Has the University Stolen the Fire in Our Bellies?” Taking Giant Steps, October 27, 2015. http://giantstepspress.blogspot.com/2015/10/has-university-stolen-fire-in our.html. Accessed November 11, 2017.

Watts, Alan W. The Wisdom of Insecurity: A Message for an Age of Anxiety. Vintage Books,  2011

The Three Tools Universities Forget to Give Us



 

by Jiahe Wang



            Like being processed in a factory, we are given professional knowledge to become future lawyers, doctors, engineers, financers and teachers at university. However, as human beings, not products, we need not only professional knowledge to support our careers but also good qualities to be responsive, humane and participating members of a democracy. Universities are like trains that carry students from carefree school life to complex society. They are supposed to provide the tools to live a principled, significant and meaningful life instead of only knowledge used in a career.

            The first tool that universities should help students to gain is self-awareness. Can you speak about your biggest strength, weakness and objective immediately? This simple question tests if you know yourself well. When I met this question in an internship test, I got stuck. And in another internship test, they gave me a personal strengths report which surprised me, because I didn’t know that I have those strengths. The internship application experience drove me to think more about myself and self-awareness. What is my character? What are my strengths and weaknesses? What is my potential? And what do I really want to do in the future? I learn professional knowledge every day at university, but without recognizing myself, where am I heading to? I was lost in my studies and ignored the need to gain a very important thing—a clear view of myself, which many college students ignore, too.

            A survey conducted by Jinan University among university students in Guangzhou, China, shows that 73% of the students don’t have clear objectives and a lot of them have no idea which direction to go after graduation. Some students choose majors according to their parents’ suggestions and employment situation without discovering their own interests and strengths. As a result, students will feel uncertain in their direction, have low study efficiency and hardly improve themselves. By comparison, if they know themselves well and what they want, they will have more confidence, a higher efficiency and constant improvement.

            Students’ lack of self-awareness is related to the college education. Universities just provide courses and care little about what each student is like. In that case, students keep on absorbing professional knowledge and ignore that they have to learn more about themselves. Universities have the responsibility to help students set up a clear self-consciousness and a viable goal. In Hofstra, students have academic advisors who help them to register suitable courses. This kind of service is helpful to students, and I think it can be expanded. Personality tests and strengths tests could be given by advisors to new students to let them learn about themselves. And through conversations, advisors can help students find their real interests and suitable study directions in time. Self-awareness is a long-term process, so continuous interaction with students is necessary.

            The second tool universities should help students to gain is an open mind. Having a major does not mean that the only thing to do at university is to learn professional knowledge. Students need a wide view of the world. Spending most of their time in the same classrooms and in the library, students know little about the outside world, so it is difficult for them to have an open mind to create new things and understand others. Universities should provide more colorful activities, not only professional knowledge. Various courses should be given to students to open their minds. Cornell University provides students with a very special course—tree climbing. Students are challenged to think analytically, to use concepts they learn to solve new problems and to enhance their assessment skills. In a fun environment, they learn about nature and become stronger physically and mentally. Travel is another excellent way to help students get a wider perspective of the world. Universities should give more students the opportunities to travel or study in other countries. As a beneficiary of an exchange program, I know what exchange experience means to students. They can see new things and cultures in other countries, learn a lot from different people and try to improve themselves and their own countries. Furthermore, universities should provide students with internship opportunities. In a working environment, students have to solve problems they have never met before at school and develop their perspectives towards work and life.

            The third tool that universities should help students to gain is social responsibility. Nowadays, students focus on themselves and care little about others and the society. University students are the future pillars of a nation. It is hard to imagine that they have no will to contribute to the nation, but only pursue personal development.

            The survey conducted by Jinan University confirms the change of Chinese students’ social responsibility during these decades. The survey shows that the university students in the sixties and the seventies studied for a prosperous and rising China. Because they are the first and second generation after the foundation of China, they studied not only for themselves, but also for the young country they loved. On the contrary, the university students in the eighties and the nineties study for a good job, in other words, for themselves. Another survey among Beijing university students shows that only 30% of students pay attention to what is happening in the country and in the world.

The change of time causes students’ lack of social responsibility, and university’s lack of social responsibility also influences students. If we look back on the original intention of building the oldest universities, we can find that it was to develop talents for the society. However, nowadays even the elite schools are involved in the commercialization of college. They charge higher and higher tuition fee relying on their names. Peking University, the top university in China, has just started a program which charges 600,000 Yuan tuition fee a year and attracted some rich movie stars to take part in. Many people criticize the practice of Peking University, because they run such a program only for the sake of money. It is true that universities need money to support them, but they may forget their responsibility to cultivate people when they are pursuing money.

To help students form social responsibility, universities should fulfill their responsibility first. They should guarantee their education quality and keep “cultivating people” as their first goal instead of making money. A positive school spirit should be constructed in a university, and students should be encouraged to learn more about the national history and take the responsibility to construct the country.

Universities should build a bridge connecting students with the society. In Hofstra, students can get free newspapers every day to learn political and economic news. Universities can also organize volunteer work in the communities. In China, voluntary teaching is organized at universities every summer vacation. In such a program, students go to poor rural areas to teach students there for about a month. When they come back to the city, they change significantly, because they have seen poverty and also simplicity they have never experienced, and realize their responsibility to the country. I believe when students feel that the nation and people need them, most of them will be willing to contribute to the society. What universities have to do is to awaken the sense of social responsibility in more students.

As Picasso said, “The meaning of life is to find your gift. The purpose of life is to give it away.” In my mind, people who are responsible, humane and participating are more valuable than those who cope well in a competitive and capitalistic society, because they know how to give, not just compete and gain. Universities have the responsibility to give students professional knowledge, and also the three tools—self awareness, an open mind and social responsibility, which is to help them find their gifts and give them away.

 

Bio Note:

I am a native of Beijing, a junior in Xi’an Jiaotong University, and an exchange student at Hofstra University for the spring semester of 2015. Xi’an, where my university is located in, is an old city in China which has been the capital of 13 dynasties. You can see terracotta warriors here, one of the nine wonders of the world. If you have the chance to visit China, Xi’an is a wonderful city you cannot miss. Apart from Xi’an, I also love New York, because I had an amazing time full of happiness there. I enjoyed the beautiful campus of Hofstra, full of tulips in spring, high-quality courses and being together with my professors and classmates. I really want to thank my professors and classmates, who gave me a lot of encouragement and power. I hope that I will go back to New York and Hofstra again in the future.

Two Ends, Too Obtuse: An Essay on the Well-Roundedness of the American Higher Education System

 

 

 

by Nguyen Dinh Giang

 

engineer-in-training, Hoftsra University

 

Society continues to move at an unprecedented pace. The world is ever smaller, thanks to a combination of the accessibility of long-range travel, the lightning-fast sharing of information, and relative global stability. The breadth of our field shrinks along with the world we inhabit, while the depth of our skills moves inversely, as more and more expertise is needed in each and every occupation. When a household microchip is smaller than the smallest thing the human eye can see, how can one rationally dream of being a polymath, of being a Jack-of-all-trades? Specializing has always been how one becomes valuable, but nowadays being highly specialized is not just a goal – it is a necessity. As the most prevalent higher education form of the present time, should colleges and universities become more conscious of their position and follow the bleeding edge? As with every issue, the question of how specialized or how well-rounded should the outcome of higher education be is not a simple one. In this case, however, I propose that the very form of higher education is behind the time, and that it is not the question of choice and rather the question of how – higher education is both not well-rounded enough and not specialized enough.

First of all, let us think about the state of institutionalized education of the present time. Although universities and schools enjoy a romantic identity of being a hall of enlightenment and a place of freedom in intellectual growth, the reality is much less so. Thanks to the changes towards a freer society, no doubt enhanced by the information freedom of the Information Age, reality is no longer behind closed doors and hidden statistics. Parents know how their children are not working at their fullest potentials; countries pool resources to fix faults in educational systems. Online outcry over education is, thankfully, a much more common occurrence. But the system stands thanks to decades of successful societal engineering.

To better understand the present we need to know the past, and looking back, the modern style of institutionalized education is not as old as people would think. In the US as well as in most of the world (we envy those who has reformed enough to be labeled “broken free of the system” like Finland), the educational system is either Prussian-inspired (the 1830s system) or Soviet-inspired (set heavily by the 1st and 2nd Five-Year Plan around 1928 –1937 – itself heavily inspired by the Prussian system). The US, for instance, was so impressed with the system that the government applied the Prussian system almost verbatim early 19th Century, and erased most of the open-education reforms around mid-Cold War with the Sputnik crisis reform (after October, 1957). In essence, American educators reformed the system to the Prussian system twice!

Widely known in academic circles as a successful social cohesion tool and simple education for the masses, the Prussian system does have undeniable advantages for its time – compulsory schooling leads to a strong base level of knowledge, introduced educational funding, salaries for educators, and a school system with emphasis on national identity as well as the introduction of science and technology to the masses. The strict rules and ranking of grades were meant to familiarize the masses to the stages and stairs of the society at the time, as well as getting the populace used to a ranked power system of the military. Out of school, the Prussian student is ready to be put into almost any contemporary occupation, will not be a hazard in war time, and possess a strong national identity that is useful to the monarchy at all times. The strict class, the heavy atmosphere, the rules, the grades and the massive lectures are all still-very-functional remnants of a more troubled era.

This is the 21st Century, however, and such drastic measures are no longer needed, and even the most traditional of educators can’t see the use of the system above the moral forming age. While many of the problems met by the Prussian monarchy and the Soviet politburo are still there and will probably here for generations to come (salary disparities, gender balance, poverty, etc.), the ones that are fixable by the system have already been fixed. In the developed world and even in most of the third world, the use of compulsory schooling has achieved what the Prussians set out to do – building a basic level of literacy and a national identity. In the most basic of educational levels, compulsory schooling and strict societal rules of the moral-forming years are still as important as ever. But compulsory classes and strict rules can only go so far in many facets of life. For example, according to Lawrence Kohlberg’s level of moral development, the successful moral outcome of the majority of the student will be around stage 3 (I do it because the society think it is acceptable), or optimally 4 (I do it because the law and order said it has to be so). Any attempt to climb higher than that will require personal growth outside of the system whether through books, debates, or other personal experiences. When it comes to highly specialized fields of this era like stock markets, computer processors, cellular engineering, nano-technology, computer programming, the nationalized common curriculum can no longer suffice.

One can no longer hope to be as ready as a Prussian student to a Prussian society after the current, outdated system. Even the Boomers are better prepared for the Boomer days than the Millennials of today. Despite tremendous efforts to “fix the holes” by talented educators, pressure from worried parents, efforts from students and occasionally help from the government, it seems like things are inching towards a standstill akin to Zeno’s paradox – where Hercules takes half of the last step as the next step towards the turtle every time. And the Information Age does not move like a turtle. The wind of change of this era is greater than any before, and it is not just the turtle – even the hare can’t compare. Higher education is, therefore, more functional and fitting for the modern age if it is not bound by the thinking that it is merely an extension of the system that came before. The efforts of society while not useless will yield little results if this first fact is not well understood – you can keep a boat afloat for longer if you plug in the holes, but it will be useless if you finally come to the sea. And a sea of change is ahead.

A successful education needs discipline and an industrious quality in both the educator and the student, but being hardworking is only half of the equation. To strive for the heavens and free oneself in the mind, one also needs a spark of inspiration that turns into a fire of passion. A free and ideal university is one that uses the industriousness of the student instead of forcing it on them, gives them the spark of inspiration they need, and feed that spark to a bursting flame of passion with fuels from books, clever classes, open discussion, frequent intellectual challenges, and even from the flame of passion of the very professors themselves.

Despite the clear advantages of such a forum, it will admittedly be still not enough. Freer, more open higher education system is obviously intellectually liberating, but there lies still the question of what is well-roundedness, and whether it is still needed. Yes, we now have a roadmap to getting a better tool – the open university. But a hammer no matter how beautifully crafted can only hammer a nail as good as the craftsman’s swing. What is well-roundedness? “Pleasingly varied or balanced.” “Having a personality that is developed in all aspects.” “Covering well the necessary areas of education.” Those are the words of the venerable Cambridge, Longman and Oxford dictionaries, and in the most general of senses they are correct. While in an education debate we would need something of more details, the aforementioned definitions serve as excellent roadmaps.

“Covering well the necessary areas of education” needs a better definition of what it means to be necessary. Some information, while invaluable for all profession, is still omitted for most university majors. You are a biology major who just got out of school, and are lucky enough to land a beautiful job thanks to your stellar grades and brilliant research. The research lab sent you the new hire files, along with some government forms on jobs. You know nothing about the hundreds of forms that everyone has to trudge through to get a job in your well-rounded education? Fear not, at least you know the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell.

To be well-rounded in this sense is to be ready for life with the basic educations for the life of a well-rounded adult. While a class that teaches dry humor and clever quips would certainly be beneficial (not to mention immensely popular), small workshops of necessary-yet-often-overlooked things like obtaining a foreign visa, filling important government forms, personal finance and budgeting, traffic etiquettes, etc. would be very valuable. Regardless of major, knowing these seemingly insignificant things would improve society immensely – in my opinion, having classes like these would both indirectly and directly affect life positively not just for the students but also the people around them. A 20-something who knows to drive politely on the streets? Unthinkable. Young people budgeting smartly, saving for houses, practicing stocks and vote responsibly? Yes, please.

Some knowledge, on the other hand, is getting superfluous. In my field of engineering, for example, some knowledge is no longer needed thanks to the advent of the computer. The work of an HVAC engineer, for example, is reduced to a clever use of the software and the memory. My father, a professional and well-respected civil engineer specializing in structural engineering, laments the system I have to study. “You still study Calculus to this degree?” he said incredulously. “ This is no different than the Soviet system I had to study. You would have thought the Americans dumped this already.” Some of the knowledge is certainly still necessary, but some of the deeper or cumbersome mathematics is usually ignored or done by computer now. A skilled engineer only messes up arithmetic due to fatigue, and machines don’t get tired. The fact that a computer can calculate in seconds what takes a team of experienced gentleman days is also a bonus. When an Asian engineer thinks the system that his son uses is still stuck in the Soviet times, that denotes a serious problem.

At the same time, the knowledge is not in depth enough in universities. With the exorbitant cost of studies in a university, one would think there is a class or at least a tutor session in which the professor (usually a brilliant PhD educator) would spill the knowledge worth that gold. Sadly, there is none, or optimistically, little. Often in class I would be bored to death (Physics is a notorious example). Not that I don’t like the subject (I actively pursue nano research), or that I don’t do well (I average in the mid-90s nowadays in tests and quizzes). The class is boring because I know Physics could be so much more than the things of the 1800s –I have already studied by myself the whole book in the first weeks, and read about more on research journals. The people who want to go into purely HVAC engineering, for example, can skip all the college Physics for life and still succeed in their fields. Someone with a knack for research like me, and a thirst for knowledge, is left annoyingly unsatisfied by the courses offered. And it’s not just research –computer programming, processor building, space and aeronautics, even gourmet cooking – are not fulfilled by many universities but the most unobtainable of ones. I used to be oblivious by these facts, but now I’m furious at times. Indeed I have a horrible track record of being a studious student before, but does that mean I will never realize my dream of being a scientist?

The current university is, therefore, ill-equipped for the business life or the academic pursuit. On one hand, it is not well-rounded enough – students leave the university like fresh chickens out of the coop, thinking they are ready for everything while they are ready for nothing. Many of the unnecessary knowledge is wasted while the basics of life is still behind the bulwarks of feeding chain – school is supposed to help you earn experience quickly, not the other way round. At the same time, it is not specialized enough –you can’t hope to enter a high-interest field nowadays with a bachelor degree alone. Extra research, internships, journals and projects is needed to enter fields, thus revealing the favorite Catch-22 of this generation: you can’t get an internship without experience, but you can’t get experience without the internship.

It is true that many, if not a majority, of students manage to do well or at least mayfly their life away in an acceptable way. In my opinion, that is horrid. The university should be such a place that at least what you get out be equal to what you put in, not where you end up having a life like a high school graduate! A 100,000 or 200,000$ investment could yield a great many courses tailored to your need, a few years of volunteer trips that turn you into a much more intellectually and emotionally mature person, or a company of your own that teaches you a lot more than most universities can right now. The reason why universities still get, in a way, the exorbitant cost they possess, is because people still live passively and still believe in the expected value of the universities.

In a way, universities are inching towards that goal of being both well-rounded and specialized, but in my opinion, it is in an indirect way. I improved my debate and English skills due to the constant debates in all areas stretching through the night with my friend on and off the Internet. I received my spark of inspiration through a Hollywood movie, and my flame of passion through the lab work of my own initiative. While the end result seems fine, universities could have done more – I doubt people know the facilities existed, and even if they do, I doubt they would have used it without a spark of their own.

All in all, while they are heading in the right direction, universities and higher education in general is still ill-equipped for both well-rounded and specialized educations, where a result would often be an engineer not skilled enough to work in his field, yet not well-rounded enough to file his tax or budget his finance without guidance. The system needs to change not just the details, but come back to the very root it started with – the full-bodied, well-rounded personal growth and an enlightenment of the mind, creating specialist that fits. I could only hope that the ship starts to change shape and do more than going full steam ahead – right now both ends are obtuse.

This essay and others can be found at Giang's website (see under blog):

nguyendinhgiang.com