Quickly solving a familiar problem does not always signal deep understanding. The Hindu argues that teachers should assess explanation and applying formulas to new problems.
A The Hindu opinion article argues that speed should not be treated as a measure of mathematical ability. Fluency and knowledge of formulas matter, but quickly recalling a familiar rule does not by itself show how well a student understands a problem.
Some children spot patterns quickly. Others need time to read a question, draw a diagram, test one approach and try another. If a teacher repeatedly says that everyone else has finished, a pupil may conclude that they are slow or incapable of mathematics. A pause may instead be part of connecting a new problem to prior knowledge.
The author illustrates the difference with a cylindrical road roller. A student may know the formula for a cylinder’s curved surface area. But finding how much road the roller covers after several turns requires understanding how the formula relates to its movement. Over n rotations, the area covered is the curved surface area multiplied by the number of turns, or 2πrh × n.
The same distinction appears in a question about a cylinder’s volume. Recalling πr²h is not enough if a student cannot explain why the area of the circular base is multiplied by the height. Understanding the formula makes it easier to apply the idea to an unfamiliar problem.
Teachers are encouraged to ask how an answer was reached and invite students to show alternative methods. The author says classrooms should value clear reasoning, persistence and testing different ideas alongside calculation fluency. The column was written by a mathematics teacher in Hyderabad.