I'm currently on the verge of my undergraduate maths studies, and have taken some time to understand where my weaknesses lie and some more in understanding whether these should determine my future career. In particular, I have realised that I am quite a slow-working maths student: my absolute favourite part of learning maths is going through the exercises and even struggling with them; however, I am notoriously slow at solving problems, especially during written exams, which brings me to my question.
Should one be concerned about how slow they are at tackling problems? For example, I'm currently going through Atiyah-Macdonald's text on Commutative Algebra, my main goal is solving most of the exercises from it; this is taking me ages. Personally, I really don't find time a "problem"... even if I spend three hours trying to solve an exercise and making no progress whatsoever, I do find myself "discovering" little things in the process and making rather useless humble conclusions which satisfy me nonetheless. One of the reasons I ask this question is that I'm not really sure how I'm supposed to interpret my failure, when I get a grade I'm not satisfied with at an exam because I feel I didn't have enough time to finish all the exercises; I'm interested in knowing if this is an issue I should worry about and maybe think to improve since I often think about maybe doing research as a grown-up soon.
Any general advice is super welcomed. Thanks in advance!
This is all based on my experience as an undergrad in maths (graduating this semester), and someone who took a few grad-level courses as well.
In theory, time is not a factor in doing problems. If you are struggling with a research question or difficult proof in Analysis or Number Theory or PDEs, usually it takes some miraculous insight or new application of a theorem. Some people will come to that insight for that particular problem faster than others. For grad school, this is a really good place to be in practice problems, where your prime goal should be to understand, as much as possible, the content: in my experience, the more that I struggled the first time, the less that I struggle when applying the techniques and theorems to a similar problem.
In practice, in grad school, there are things like exams for class, or, even more, comprehensive exams for maintaining in grad school. The primary purpose of this is twofold.
You should eventually be able to see a problem and recognize the associated terms and theorem relatively quickly, especially if you continue with research since that's what you will want to be able to do to answer questions.
There is only a limited amount of time in the semester/trimester/quarter, and so you will have to test the students somehow.
For me, by no means would I consider myself a "fast learner," especially as I got to higher level real and complex analysis. BUT, the important thing is that once I finally got through a problem, picturing it in my head/on paper, and struggling and working through the associated theorems/lemmas, I came out much more prepared for the exam in the end. Even though I wasn't the number 1 student in my class, I was able to achieve relatively well by struggling in this way. Speed naturally will come from more practice, and seeing patterns in how to apply the theorems, similar to speed in taking derivatives.
If you feel that you are slow because of other factors, such as getting easily distracted, getting panicked, etc. you can contact your school's accessibility services, and they should be able to accommodate some issues (with the professor involved in the process) in a fair way. I personally did not use these services but a few of a my friends in graduate analysis did use them and it helped them a lot with their anxiety, especially because some of them struggled with English and so having translated tests made them much more comfortable.