<![CDATA[The Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic (VAK) learning styles framework has been widely implemented in education under the assumption that matching instruction to students' sensory preferences enhances learning outcomes. However, contemporary cognitive neuroscience increasingly categorizes this modality-matching hypothesis as a "neuromyth." This study aims to critically evaluate the empirical evidence surrounding VAK modality matching in enhancing students' Higher-Order Thinking Skills (HOTS), identify the underlying cognitive mechanisms, and delineate evidence-based pedagogical alternatives. Employing a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) guided by the PRISMA framework, this study analyzed 20 peer-reviewed articles (15 empirical studies and 5 theoretical/review papers published between 2016 and 2026) retrieved from Scopus, Google Scholar, and GARUDA. Data were analyzed using inductive Thematic Content Analysis. The synthesis yielded three primary findings: (1) 14 out of 20 studies (70%) highlighted systemic methodological limitations in pro-VAK literature, including reliance on self-report questionnaires; (2) empirical studies measuring HOTS showed no statistically significant advantage for VAK-matched instruction over non-matched instruction; and (3) higher-order cognition recruits distributed prefrontal cortical networks that function multisensorily rather than through isolated sensory channels. Based on these neurocognitive mechanisms, this review highlights that attempting to isolate VAK tracks risks increasing extraneous cognitive load while diverting essential mental effort away from germane processing. This study concludes that VAK matching lacks robust empirical support for HOTS development and recommends shifting pedagogical practice toward integrated multisensory strategies, such as Dual Coding and Universal Design for Learning (UDL).]]>
