My finding is rather surprising to me.

I think the result helps me to obtain a more holistic

perspective on learning and teaching. That is, learning is not just about skill, but also largely
related to a student’s self-motivation, his or her relationship with the teacher, and many other
personal virtues of the teacher and the students.
I spent my first nine years of education in China. With so much respect and nostalgia
towards my schools there, there was always a “myth” for me: there were a few “crippled
learners” in every class that I had. A “crippled learner” is a student who’s accelerating in one
subject whereas almost failing in the other. (Usually, this combination of two subjects are
language/ literature and STEM). This label often put those students into a bittersweet dilemma:
they were passionately loved and wholeheartedly trusted by one teacher who taught their
advantageous subject, and almost despised by the other teacher of their behind subject. Despite
how stellar those “crippled learners” were in their subject of strength, it was an open secret that
they wouldn’t go too far in that standardize test-based curriculum in China. Therefore, even
though I knew my teachers in China truly cared about those students, they could only do so
much, since they had another hundred more balanced students to teach and help with. During my
high school years in California, I barely knew any “crippled learners”, since grade became a
confidentiality. Besides, when one student showed signs of suffering in one particular subject,
my high school- a very tight-knit and liberal private school-- would do everything to prevent
further consequences. When I first started my research inquiry, I thought those ESL students
were very subjective to become a “crippled learner”. Some of them were significantly behind in
English. Had been an ESL student myself, I understand how comforting and incentive it could be
to devote all my effort into a STEM class, where I wouldn’t feel inferior to any native speakers.
Besides, middle school C is a sizeable public school, where teachers were less likely to focus on
how “balanced” a student is.
Obviously, my finding has proven me wrong. All three observed students were quite
consistent in terms of their improvement pace. Two of them (A and Y) even felt more
comfortable in their BE classroom than in science, even if science seemed more like a “fair
game” for them to me. Yet, even them are motivated by different reasons. According to Carl
Rogers (1961), self-motivation is the key of meaningful learning. Student A obviously grasped
this quality quite well. Even when her grade was not great in October, she never gave up.
Although she cared about her grade, that was not her stress. She had impresses me with such
genuine curiosity to the English language, never ceased asking questions till she “got it”. She and
Ms. D both had touched me with their patience. I saw A’s motivation to learn at the beginning,
and I expected it to bring a fast bloom. However, I was wrong. A didn’t show much sign of
improvement till mid-November. Before then, her grade in the BE class dropped from a 75%
percent to a 45% within that time period. As I talked to Ms. Lauren and Professor Martinelle
about it, I was very disheartened. I didn’t relate my feelings to “impatience”- I even thought it
was quite valid. Until I read J.M Banner and H.C Cannon (1997), they mention that for an
educator, patience means a restraint of frustration, and more importantly, patience is keeping
hoping. Through their lens, A and Ms. D were much more patient than I was. In that month
without any improvement, A kept participating eagerly in the BE class, and Ms. D always spoke
of A highly. Ms. D constantly reminded me that improvement sometimes came slow. As long as
we, as teachers, saw the good fuel inside of A, noticeable progress was just a matter of time. Ms.
D was right. This experience was a great reminder for me to have more patience to my future
students.
 J and Y confirmed Arthur Combs (1982)’s point on the importance of “affective factors” in
learning. J, as a child who deprives attention, feeling cared for impacts his in-class performance
largely. He’d change his behaviors to capture that teacher’s attention. For Y, it has shown in a
more subtle way. Although she remained introverted, towards the end of my time there, when
she possibly found out that I cared so much about her, she actively asked me to do math with her.
I still remember how much she was into those problems and her smiles when she got them right.
According to Mr. P, Y’s math teacher in school C, Y always acted so aloof in math class.
Apparently, she could be extremely interested and tentative when she sensed that personal
connection. On the other hand, Mr. P’s constant negative perception might have influenced Y’s
in-class performance in math, too. As Gloria Ladson-Billings (2008) discusses, successful
teaching tightly reflects how a teacher thinks about the students. Goodwill and enthusiasm from
teacher are always ideal for students, though in Y’s case, Mr. P had lost both to her when he
perceived Y as “lazy”. Teachers are entitled to their own judgements. However, it is a good
warning for me that I should know a student more holistically—such as his or her personal
experience, cultural background -- before having a negative perception on him or her.