Abstract

Scaffolding interactions are typically portrayed optimistically within 4E frameworks of cognition. In this paper, we argue that this “dogma of harmony” has also influenced research on scaffolding interactions during development. Specifically, we show how some scaffolding interactions aimed at supporting task execution and skill acquisition in early childhood can inadvertently lead to detrimental effects on learners’ wellbeing, understood in terms of what individuals are capable of achieving rather than through the resources they possess. To characterise these effects, we propose a model that highlights the manifold ways in which individual differences interact with scaffolds’ features during developmental processes. Using this model, we discuss two types of maladaptive scenarios: those where the scaffolds are efficient to various degrees depending on _inter_-individual differences, and those where scaffolds’ efficiency is tied to particular timeframes depending on _intra_-individual differences. The upshot of this discussion is that, to challenge the harmony dogma, more inclusive education policies should not only consider scaffolds’ efficiency but also determine whether individuals can adequately transform their use into valuable opportunities for their learning across contexts and timescales.