Translanguaging Routines
Translanguaging routines are planned, recurring moments in a lesson where emergent bilingual (EB) students are explicitly invited to draw on their full linguistic repertoire (home language, English, and everything in between) to make sense of content, deepen thinking, and produce language. Translanguaging theory treats a bilingual learner as having one integrated linguistic repertoire rather than two separate language systems to be kept apart, so the home language becomes a resource for learning, not a problem to remove (García & Wei, 2014). García et al. (2017) describe translanguaging pedagogy through three components: a stance (the teacher's belief that bilingualism is a resource), a design (intentional planning of bilingual instructional spaces and supports), and shifts (in-the-moment responsiveness to how students actually use language). Making this pedagogy routine and predictable signals to students that bringing their whole linguistic self is always welcome.
How it’s typically applied
- 1Adopt the stance first: communicate, in words and in how the lesson is structured, that home languages are intellectual assets and are always allowed for thinking, talking, and drafting (García et al., 2017).
- 2Identify the lesson's content and language objectives, then plan one to three predictable moments as designated translanguaging spaces (for example, a bilingual think-pair-share before writing, or a home-language preview of key vocabulary).
- 3Build a multilingual toolkit students can reach for independently: bilingual word walls, cognate charts, dual-language glossaries, translated or audio texts, and translation tools, so the home language is materially present in the room (Celic & Seltzer, 2013).
- 4Front-load comprehension by previewing the big idea or key terms in the home language (or letting students do so), activating prior knowledge before tackling the same concept in English; this deliberately promotes cross-linguistic transfer (Cummins, 2017).
- 5Open processing routines in which students may discuss, brainstorm, annotate, or draft in any language, then move toward a shared output in English; group home-language peers together so they can support one another's thinking.
- 6Make cross-linguistic connections explicit by naming cognates, comparing how an idea is expressed across languages, and inviting students to notice patterns, which builds metalinguistic awareness.
- 7Close the routine by having students show learning in the lesson's target language while crediting the home-language thinking that got them there, then reflect on what helped and refine the routine over time.
Why it works for emergent bilingual students
Translanguaging routines are powerful for EB students because learning is not stored in separate, sealed language compartments. Cummins's interdependence hypothesis and common underlying proficiency hold that concepts, literacy, and academic skills developed in one language transfer to and strengthen another, so home-language thinking directly supports English learning rather than competing with it; instruction should therefore promote transfer explicitly rather than keep languages apart (Cummins, 2017). Letting students reason through content in their strongest language lowers anxiety and frees cognitive resources for sense-making, which protects comprehension and participation; this is consistent with Krashen's claim that a low affective filter supports second language acquisition (Krashen, 1982). It also positions students' bilingualism as the asset it is, supporting identity, engagement, and well-being, consistent with the asset-based, can-do orientation toward multilingual learners in the WIDA framework (García et al., 2017; WIDA, 2020). This asset-based orientation also aligns with the revised Texas ELPS, which frame emergent bilingual students' home languages as resources for learning. Used well, translanguaging does not slow English development; it gives students more, not fewer, pathways into rigorous grade-level content and academic language.
Adapting it across proficiency levels
Pre-Production
At Pre-Production, accept and actively welcome the home language as the primary channel for meaning-making. Let newcomers think, label, draw, and respond in their home language or non-verbally (pointing, sorting, matching) while you supply home-language previews, bilingual labels, visuals, and translated or audio support. The goal is comprehension and belonging, not English output; taking part in the thinking counts as participation.
Beginning
At Beginning, students still rely heavily on the home language to process and rehearse, then attempt short English output. Pair them with a home-language peer for bilingual discussion before producing English words or phrases. Provide cognate charts, sentence stems, and bilingual glossaries so they can preview in the home language and produce simple English with support.
Intermediate
At Intermediate, structure routines so students do exploratory thinking, brainstorming, and first drafts in either language, then revise toward English for the shared product. Explicitly teach cross-linguistic strategies (using cognates, comparing sentence structures) so students consciously transfer what they know from the home language into more extended English speech and writing.
High Intermediate / Advanced
At High Intermediate and Advanced, invite students to use the home language strategically for the most cognitively demanding tasks (complex analysis, planning an argument, clarifying nuance) while the polished academic product is in English. Have them compare registers and rhetorical moves across languages to build metalinguistic awareness and biliteracy, and, when they choose, serve as language brokers who model translanguaging for peers.
In the classroom
In a 7th-grade science class studying ecosystems, before reading an English text on food webs, the teacher runs a translanguaging preview routine. Students watch a short visual on energy flow, then turn to a partner and explain in their home language (Spanish, Vietnamese, or English) what they think happens when one species disappears, jotting key terms on a bilingual sticky-note web. The teacher posts a cognate chart (productor/producer, consumidor/consumer) and a dual-language glossary. Students then read the English text, annotate in any language, and discuss in mixed pairs. For the exit task, all students write a claim in English about a disrupted food web, drawing on the home-language thinking and the cognate chart they built. A Pre-Production newcomer takes part by labeling a diagram in her home language and matching organism cards, while an Advanced student writes a paragraph in English and notes how the term "consumidor" helped him remember the concept.
Research basis
Translanguaging is an instructional and assessment pedagogy built on stance, design, and shifts that leverages students' full bilingual repertoire as a resource for learning rigorous content and developing academic language.
García, O., Johnson, S. I., & Seltzer, K. (2017). The translanguaging classroom: Leveraging student bilingualism for learning. Caslon. [link]
Translanguaging theory reframes the bilingual learner as having one integrated linguistic repertoire rather than two separate language systems, and describes how bilingual students use translanguaging to learn and teachers use it to teach.
García, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. Palgrave Macmillan. [link]
Concepts, literacy, and academic skills developed in a student's home language transfer across languages (common underlying proficiency and interdependence), so instruction should explicitly promote cross-linguistic transfer rather than keep languages separate.
Cummins, J. (2017). Teaching for transfer in multilingual school contexts. In O. García, A. M. Y. Lin, & S. May (Eds.), Bilingual and multilingual education (3rd ed., pp. 103–115). Springer. [link]
Practical, planned classroom structures (bilingual word walls, cognate charts, multilingual previews and discussion) let teachers use students' bilingualism as a resource to support both content and language learning.
Celic, C., & Seltzer, K. (2013). Translanguaging: A CUNY-NYSIEB guide for educators. CUNY-NYSIEB, The Graduate Center, The City University of New York. [link]
A low affective filter supports second language acquisition, so allowing students to access content and reduce anxiety through their stronger language supports comprehension and participation.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press. [link]
Standards frameworks for multilingual learners take an asset-based, can-do orientation toward students' full linguistic repertoires.
WIDA. (2020). WIDA English language development standards framework, 2020 edition: Kindergarten–grade 12. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. [link]
Sources reviewed by an independent second-language-acquisition specialist and an adversarial citation audit.
Ask Verónica about Translanguaging Routines
Verónica is our AI tutor, and she knows this strategy. Tell her about your classroom, your mix of proficiency levels, or a specific TEKS you are planning to teach, and she will help you put Translanguaging Routines to work.
These strategies are part of the free ELPS Online Helper. Learn the 2026 ELPS and earn 1 hour of CPE credit.
Explore the free course