_1704001784 20231231091944000 Rovedar Daryoushbabazadeh@gmail.com Rovedar Journal of Contemporary Language Research J. Contemp. Lang. Res. 2980-8065 12 24 2023 2 4 Emel Kucukali https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5162-6914 Kubra Er https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5995-6224 Introduction: The present quantitative study aimed to compare the translanguaging pedagogies used by native and non-native EFL teachers in their academic writing classes in a Türkish university context. Translanguaging pedagogies included strategies such as switching between and speaking multiple languages, comparing languages and cultures, and making use of translation. Methodology: A native EFL teacher, a non-native EFL teacher, and their students (N = 32) were purposefully selected from the English pre-sessional program of a Türkish university. The native teacher is British, and the non-native teacher and the students are of Türkish nationality. Data was collected from two audio recordings of teachers’ academic writing classes. Data were analyzed through descriptive statistics such as the frequency of translanguaging pedagogies and English and Türkish words of the participants by using CLAN (Computerized Language ANalysis) Program. Results: The findings revealed differences between the teachers’ classes. In the non-native teacher’s class, language integration (students’ L1 and target language) was more intensive, compared to the session with the native teacher. The frequency of Türkish words was high and close to the frequency of English words in the non-native teacher’s classroom, while English was dominating Türkish in the native teacher’s session at a significant level. Similarly, the switches between languages were much more in the classroom of the non-native teacher. Another finding indicated that the non-native teacher made much more use of translanguaging pedagogies than her native counterpart. Apart from code-switching, the non-native teacher compared English and Türkish grammar and translated vocabulary, sentences, and her questions to the students very often. On the other hand, the native EFL teacher only compared American and British cultures. Conclusion: Native and non-native EFL teachers may approach translanguaging differently in the classroom, and this also affects the translanguaging behavior of their students accordingly. Further research is suggested with qualitative and longitudinal studies on native vs. non-native EFL teachers’ translanguaging. Implications were recommended at the end of the study. 12 25 2023 192 198 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 10.58803/jclr.v2i4.90 https://jclr.rovedar.com/index.php/JCLR/article/view/90 https://jclr.rovedar.com/index.php/JCLR/article/download/90/105 https://jclr.rovedar.com/index.php/JCLR/article/download/90/105 10.1080/22040552.2015.1084674 10.30983/mj.v1i1.4727 10.1080/01434632.2022.2045300 Cai, Y., & Fang, F. (2022). TESOL in transition: Examining Stakeholders’ use of and attitudes toward translanguaging and multimodal practices in EFL contexts. Taiwan Journal of TESOL, 19(1), 7-33. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1331965.pdf 10.1111/josl.12440 10.1111/weng.12462 10.1515/eduling-2022-0009 Council of Europe (2020). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment – Companion volume. https://rm.coe.int/common-european-framework-of-reference-for-languages-learning-teaching/16809ea0d4 10.1075/ml.3.3.07ell 10.15639/teflinjournal.v33i1/47-74 10.21832/9781783092246-018 10.1057/9781137385765 10.1515/applirev-2022-0062 10.17509/jpp.v20i2.27046 10.1006/jmla.1994.1008 Kroll, J. F., & Tokowicz, N. (2005). Models of bilingual representation and processing: Looking back and to the future. Oxford University Press. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer 10.2307/2529310 10.1177/0033688220939222 MacWhinney, B. (2000). The childes project: Tools for analyzing talk: Transcription format and programs. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2000-03630-000 Putri, F. I., & Rifai, I. (2021). Translanguaging practices In EFL classrooms: Teachers’ perspective. English Journal Literacy Utama, 6(1), 460-470. https://doi.org/10.33197/ejlutama.v6i1.155 10.1016/j.linged.2022.101020 10.37546/JALTJJ40.2-3 10.1080/15235882.2019.1589603 Viera, A. J., & Garrett, J. M. (2005). Understanding interobserver agreement: The kappa statistic. Family Medicine, 37(5), 360-363. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15883903/ 10.1002/9781444301120 Williams, C. (1996). Secondary education: Teaching in the bilingual situation. In C. Williams, G. Lewis, & C. Baker (Eds.), The language policy: Taking stock (pp. 193-211). 10.58304/ijts.20230105 10.17263/jlls.586811 10.1080/17501229.2021.1892698 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1118261