BILINGUAL PROMPTING STRATEGIES FOR HIGHER-ORDER THINKING IN EFL WRITING

Аннотация

This article develops a theory-into-practice account of bilingual prompting strategies designed to elicit higher-order thinking—analysis, evaluation, and creation—in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) academic writing. Building on research in translanguaging, cognitive load theory, metacognition, and rhetorical genre studies, it argues that task-embedded prompts that strategically alternate or combine learners’ L1 and English can expand working memory, deepen conceptual access, and stabilize argumentative moves without undermining target-language development. The paper models bilingual prompts as micro-scaffolds that operate at four loci: ideation and problem framing, evidence synthesis and warranting, stance and hedging, and revision-for-transfer. Keywords: bilingual prompting, higher-order thinking, EFL writing, translanguaging, metacognition, cognitive load, argumentation, synthesis, revision, assessment. ДВУЯЗЫЧНЫЕ СТРАТЕГИИ СТИМУЛИРОВАНИЯ МЫШЛЕНИЯ БОЛЕЕ ВЫСОКОГО ПОРЯДКА ПРИ НАПИСАНИИ ТЕКСТОВ НА EFL Аннотация. В статье представлена концепция и практическая модель двуязычных подсказок, направленных на формирование мышления высокого порядка— анализа, оценки и создания—в академическом письме по английскому как иностранному. Опираясь на исследования транслангуаджинга, теории когнитивной нагрузки, метакогниции и риторических жанров, автор утверждает, что задания с целенаправленным чередованием или сочетанием L1 и английского расширяют рабочую память, углубляют доступ к понятиям и стабилизируют аргументацию без подрыва развития целевого языка. Ключевые слова: двуязычные подсказки, мышление высокого порядка, академическое письмо EFL, транслангуаджинг, метакогниция, когнитивная нагрузка, аргументация, синтез, ревизия, оценивание. The problem that motivates this inquiry is not whether EFL learners should be allowed to use their first language while writing in English, but how bilingual resources can be designed into writing pedagogy so that higher-order thinking becomes more likely and more visible. Decades of second language research show that complex reasoning, evaluation of evidence, and creative synthesis depend on conceptual access and working-memory bandwidth that may be constrained when learners operate exclusively in a non-dominant language. When instructors prohibit L1 use categorically, students may manage surface correctness yet struggle to develop and defend claims with the nuance expected in academic discourse. Conversely, unrestricted L1 use risks displacing the hard work of L2 formulation and register control. Bilingual prompting seeks a principled middle path: a transparent, scaffolded alternation between L1 and English that preserves authorship in the target language while using the first language to expand thinking, reduce extraneous load, and enforce discipline in reasoning. A theoretical synthesis grounds this approach. Translanguaging research reframes learners’ languages not as sealed systems but as an integrated repertoire for meaning-making and identity work; it invites pedagogy that orchestrates cross-lingual resources to accomplish 330 ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 10 cognitively demanding tasks. Cognitive load theory, for its part, distinguishes intrinsic load (complexity inherent to the task), extraneous load (inefficiency added by poor design), and germane load (effort devoted to schema construction). Writing tasks that require source-based synthesis, counterargument, and warranting are intrinsically complex; a rigid L2-only policy can add extraneous load, leaving too little germane capacity for the actual reasoning. Metacognitive theory contributes the idea that self-explanation and planning prompts can externalize thought, making revision and transfer more likely. Rhetorical genre studies emphasize that argument and synthesis are not generic skills but patterned moves indexed to specific disciplinary communities; prompts that name those moves and allow L1 rehearsal can accelerate uptake. These perspectives converge on the pedagogical gamble: if we design bilingual prompts well, students will think more deeply and write more responsibly. This article therefore treats bilingual prompts as micro-scaffolds that can be placed strategically in the writing cycle. At the stage of ideation and problem framing, two families of prompts dominate. The first is the “concept lattice,” in which students sketch a claim space in L1—listing competing lenses, key variables, and possible causal pathways—before translating only the selected lens and variables into English. Here the L1 activity is bounded and purpose- built: it widens the hypothesis field while forestalling premature L2 phrasing that might lock the argument too early. The second family is the “counterfactual seed”: learners generate in L1 a concise description of the world if their claim were false, then produce in English the minimal evidence that would distinguish truth from that counterfactual. The alternati