I believe a property of the "good at math" persona is that the individual can just "magically" solve a math problem _quickly_ in there heads, or more precisely, this individual already possesses the answer, but just needs to recall it, akin to recalling a history fact.
Yes, by practicing maths, you will eventually develop some "muscle memory" for certain types of problems, but understanding or solving a math equation does not inherently have time constraints associated with it, yet we somehow believe that to be part of what it means to be proficient in maths.
This false belief has held me back from believing I could achieve more in mathematics - the idea that if I can't find the solution to a problem in under 10 seconds, I obviously don't know or can't figure out the answer.
Thank you for making this point that is quite obvious, but has enlightened me.
P.S. I meant to point out the irony that English classes contributed comparatively little. Actually writing about something and putting in the effort to string together something coherent is what really exercises and builds writing abilities. It's nice to have some of the groundwork laid, but practice is by far the most important component.
In 6th grade and beyond, the school went to a more traditional math curriculum, I suspect due to milestones such as getting through algebra in 8th grade, etc. For the kids to do more writing in math class requires a choice of what they will spend less time on. Do they learn fewer math topics, get fewer assignments in Social Studies, or get less sleep?
Maybe I'm a freak, but as a student I greatly enjoyed the "pure" nature of math. In other subjects, I found that I could get good grades by basically filling pages with drivel. On the other hand I didn't just write down solutions. I was expected to show a derivation, and in many cases, a proof. I have a copy of my high school pre-calc textbook, and a large fraction of the chapter problems are proofs, which I loved. That's what motivated me to become a math major in college. Today, the proofs have disappeared.
Moreover, some conjectures don't get proved as theorems for decades or centuries, and even after such long periods of time, the conjecture might still sometimes be refuted or proved independent of the axiom framework.
2. 'Removing the time pressure from math is another important issue for Boaler. Neuroscience research... has shown that time pressure often blocks the brain’s working memory from functioning. This is particularly bad for kids with test anxiety. “The irony of this is mathematicians are not fast with numbers,” Boaler said. “We value speed in math classrooms, but I’ve talked with lots of mathematicians who say they’re not fast at all.” '
I have experienced the truth of both of these points during my math education, and have recently started talking with professors (I'm an undergrad stat major) about the idiocy of timed exams in math. Timed exams test for speed, which is not something that matters in real mathematics (if you can prove a theorem in one week vs. two it doesn't really matter), and this can push people out of the discipline who would otherwise stay. As people discuss retention rates in stem fields, particularly with under-represented groups, I hope they will consider getting rid of time limits as an avenue of effective policy change.