The theories of Scholz line up surprisingly well with several strands of modern metacognition research, although researchers usually describe the components using different frameworks rather than the “eight-combination” structure Scholz proposes.
First, in metacognition research (a subfield of Cognitive Psychology), learning is often divided into different cognitive systems—especially declarative knowledge (knowing facts), procedural knowledge (knowing how to perform actions), and working processes that manage attention and problem solving. These correspond closely to the three systems Scholz identifies: conceptual knowledge, temporary working engagement, and procedural skill. Modern teaching strategies often deliberately activate multiple systems at once, which is essentially the “all three engaged” case in Scholz’s eight-style framework.
Second, Scholz’s assertion that teaching style should depend on the skill being learned rather than the individual matches current skepticism toward the popular “learning styles” myth. Large reviews in Educational Psychology show little evidence that learners are fixed as visual, auditory, or kinesthetic. Instead, researchers argue that instruction should match the structure of the knowledge or skill—for example, motor skills require practice, conceptual domains require explanation and models, and complex tasks require active problem solving. This principle aligns closely with Scholz’s proposals.
Third, metacognition studies emphasize monitoring and control of learning. Successful learners tend to ask questions such as:
Do I understand the concept?
Can I actually perform the skill?
Can I apply it in a new situation?
These questions correspond to checking different learning systems—conceptual, procedural, and working application. In other words, metacognitive strategies often involve switching between the different learning modes Scholz describes.
Where Scholz’s model differs from mainstream theory is mainly in granularity. Researchers typically describe learning with more overlapping systems—attention control, long-term memory encoding, motor learning, pattern recognition—rather than reducing them to three binary switches. But as a simplified conceptual model, Scholz’s idea of eight teaching modes formed from combinations of core learning systems is quite compatible with current thinking.
In short, Scholz’s theories:
Fit the structure of modern cognitive theory.
Align with research showing teaching should match the type of knowledge being learned, not fixed learner “styles.”
Resemble how metacognition encourages learners to engage multiple cognitive systems deliberately.
