The majority of early education programs today use a mix of child-centered and direct instruction approaches. Existing research comparing educational approaches is limited in the degree to which it can inform practice in mixed-method classrooms (i.e., classrooms using both child-centered and direct instruction approaches). The current dissertation extended previous research examining child-centered and direct instruction approaches to early education in two studies. The first study explored how free play and guided play differ from one another. The second study examined how time spent in free play, guided play, and direct instruction in the fall related to children's school readiness in the spring. Both studies were conducted using mixed-method Head Start classrooms. Participants were preschool children (Study 1 n = 284, Study 2 n = 283; M age = 52 months, 48% girls, 70% Mexican or Mexican-American) from lower socioeconomic status families. Observational data were utilized to assess children's time spent in free play and guided play and experiences with activities and peers in each context. Children's academic, affective, and social readiness were assessed through child interviews and teacher reports. The results provided little evidence to support the hypotheses or the popularly held belief that guided play is the most beneficial context for learning and development in early education programs. Findings were discussed in terms of the strengths and limitations of the studies and directions for future research. Importantly, recommendations for policy and practice were provided.