I don't think so either, but there is the implication that one is superior. I thought he was describing the difference between learning to teach in a more modern methodology compared to older methods, both of which I think can be great. My point about Gardner's types of intelligence was just that different folks gravitate toward different methods. We all have all of those (and probably many other) learning modes, but whatever some teacher is expressing, it will probably click for some similarly-minded student. So I get the impression it's hard to say one way or some others isn't/aren't as good, because it depends on the context of who is learning from them.
I'm not suggesting simply throw out what has been done before and replace it with modern methodology. I am saying use modern science of learning to inform what we are doing as teachers in the dojo. I'm primarily a koryu budo guy, the really old stuff, and I use a classical pedagogy when I teach koryu budo. However, I inform that with understanding of things like how much information an individual can retain at one time, and I build my classical style class around the facts of human learning and mind capacity.