The results of the study showed some promise in addressing the Matthew Effect in education for low-achieving students:

• the students who were taught the relevant design-thinking strategy for the CBA (getting feedback for poster designing, exploring choices for photo taking and apex deciding) received the best results compared to the control group
• despite the student being either high-achieving or low-achieving, the ones who had the relevant design-thinking skill had similar results, which showed a potential negating of the Matthew effect in education/achievement gap
• results for the control group (the one who did not have the relevant design-thinking strategy for their CBA) depended on the prior achievement of the student, further suggesting that education in design-thinking strategies can help close the difference between high and low achieving students
• using the proper design-thinking strategy for the right CBA showed better performance and learning (i.e. exploring choices in photo taking led to better photos and understanding of photography)
• results indicate that high-achieving students tend to already employ design-thinking strategies and that low-achieving students do not usually know how or when to use them, so that being taught these strategies helps them in solving problems and achieving results similar to those of high-achieving students