Student-centered learning is often associated with greater equity in the classroom. But does it actually reduce achievement gaps? A new study by Zhu et al. (2026)1 suggests the answer may be more complicated than many educators assume.
To investigate this question, Zhu and colleagues analyzed how different teaching approaches related to equity in real classrooms. They distinguished between two broad categories of instruction: (i) teacher-led instruction (e.g., explicit, direct teaching); and (ii) student-centered learning (e.g., discovery, inquiry-based, problem-based approaches).
Using a large, nationally representative dataset of U.S. eighth-grade mathematics students, the researchers examined how each approach related to achievement across socioeconomic groups. Both teacher-led and student-centered practices were used at similar rates across schools serving different socioeconomic communities, allowing meaningful comparison.
Teacher-led instruction, characterized by clear explanations, structured support, and guided practice, was associated with significantly stronger mathematics performance for students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. It was also the only approach that reduced the achievement gap between low- and middle-SES students. Student-centered approaches, characterized by inquiry, exploration, and greater student autonomy, were not associated with reductions in the achievement gap.
The study raises an important question: Why might student-centered practices, which are often assumed to promote equity, be less effective in shrinking achievement gaps? To illustrate why they can sometimes produce less equitable outcomes, consider the following scenario: