Code-switching — the alternation between two or more languages in a communicative event — has been progressively reframed in applied linguistics from an indicator of deficient proficiency toward a legitimate resource for multilingual learning. This conceptual article reviews theoretical and empirical literature on code-switching and translanguaging in EFL classrooms in order to derive a pedagogical framework for the multilingual context of Central Papua, Indonesia. Using a narrative, thematic review of foundational theory and empirical studies on Indonesian and Papuan multilingual education, the article draws on interactional sociolinguistics, sociocultural theory, and translanguaging scholarship, treating code-switching and translanguaging as complementary rather than identical: the former foregrounds movement between socially recognisable codes, the latter the holistic mobilisation of a multilingual repertoire. The review addresses a gap that province-wide language counts and Java-, Bali-, and Sumatra-based studies leave open-how multilingual EFL pedagogy should operate where learners simultaneously negotiate indigenous languages, Papuan Malay as a regional lingua franca, Standard Indonesian, and English. Recognising this layered repertoire, the article proposes a Layered-Repertoire Translanguaging Framework organised around seven components-Repertoire mapping, pedagogical purpose, strategic language choice, multilingual mediation, English development, equity and identity, and reflective adjustment-that together keep multilingual mediation accountable to English-learning goals. The article argues for principled multilingual pedagogy rather than opposition to English instruction: rigid English-only policies fail to recognise the learning, interactional, and identity resources of Central Papuan classrooms, while undisciplined switching risks under-serving learners’ English development. The framework is theoretically derived and offered as a testable proposal for teacher education and future classroom research
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Monige et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: