Abstract
<p>Existing accounts of motivation, cognition, and instruction in educational psychology—attribution theory, self-determination theory, cognitive load theory, expectancy-value theory—specify mechanisms within a single actor or domain, but none proposes that resolving one domain constrains what becomes attainable in another, for a different person, later in time. We term this absence the sequential scaffolding gap and propose a four-stage framework: teacher motivational and attributional readiness, student relational and motivational engagement, cognitive articulation, and transfer to novel contexts. The claim is split into two tiers to satisfy recent calls for mechanism-specified, falsifiable motivation theorizing. Tier 1 states a strict, channel-specific necessity—a depleted psychological state cannot supply a resource it does not hold—falsified only by evidence that a channel outputs what it lacks. Tier 2 states a probabilistic dependency—disruption degrades downstream outcomes unless a named compensatory pathway intervenes—falsified by ordinary empirical evidence. Three independent published studies, spanning faculty mindset, classroom threat-and-load profiles, and cognitive training outcomes, document disruption consistent with each stage transition, though no study tests the sequence as an integrated whole. We specify falsifiable predictions, a measurement agenda, and boundary conditions, and discuss implications for how teacher support, student support, and instructional funding decisions are evaluated.</p>