International Journal of Language and Linguistics 2013; 1(1): 6-10 Published online December 30, 2013 (http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/ijll) doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.s.20130101.12 EFL teachers’ beliefs and performances on code switching (Iranian setting) Fahime Farjami, Hanieh Davatgari Asl Department of English Language Teaching, Ahar branch, Islamic Azad University, Ahar, Iran Email address: fahimefarjami@yahoo.com (F. Farjami), hdavatgar@ymail.com (H. D. Asl) To cite this article: Fahime Farjami, Hanieh Davatgari Asl. EFL Teachers’ Beliefs and Performances on Code Switching (Iranian Setting). International Journal of Language and Linguistics. Special Issue: Language Teaching and Learning Key Principles (LTLKP). Vol. 1, No. 1, 2013, pp. 6-10. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.s.20130101.12 Abstract: Code switching occurs when bilinguals of two or more languages use them in the same discourse. There are different reasons why and several manners how EFL teachers apply this strategy in their classroom setting. Different instructional, cognitive, affective, and behavioral purposes underlies code switching strategy. It can foster different skills and components of language when care and attention is fully given to the tasks. Removing learners' emotional impediments like anxiety, lack of self confidence and weak self esteem in language learning is the outcome of its affective aim. This study was done to find the Iranian teachers' functions, manner, reasons, and contributions of Code-switching in their teaching process. The participants were 20 English teachers from several universities located in North of Iran. They were provided with some interview questions on Code Switching. The analysis of the answers was an indication of similarities and differences in their beliefs and performances on this strategy in their teaching process. Keywords: Code switching (C.S.), Bilingualism, Culture, Facilitator 1. Introduction The present study is a broad explanation of different aims of applying C.S. by EFL teachers in Iran. In this regard, cognitive and affective functions are analyzed. Also, the functions, reasons, manner etc are elaborated on. 2. Literature Review According to Nunan & Carter (2001), switching from one language to another in the same discourse is called code switching. In fact, it refers to a transition between the native language of the learners and the foreign language being taught in EFl classroom. Adendorff (1996) considers C.S. as a communicative resource enabling teachers and students to accomplish a high range of social and educational objectives. (p. 389). Its modifying effect for personal intentions as a facilitator has been discussed by Trudgil (2000). He believes that Transferring from first language to second language facilitates the acquisition of second language. As a communication facilitator, Gumperz (1982) finds C.S. beneficial in conveying precise meaning, appealing to the literate and illiterate, capturing attention, stressing a point and communicating more effectively. There are many reasons why learners use C.S. in their classrooms. Floor holding, equivalence and reiteration are the most common. Floor holding can fill the gap with native language in a target language conversation. Equivalence relates to using equivalents of some lexical items in the target language and accordingly can help learners to improve their linguistic incompetence in target language. Another function of C.S. is reiteration where learners in order to fully convey the message, repeat the target language messages by their native language. Skiba (1997) considers C.S. as a mean for continuity in speech, since it transfers meaning between two languages. EFL teachers apply C.S. automatically and unconsciously in their classrooms. The use of C.S. by teachers has different functions. Burden (2001) believed that C.S. acts as facilitator in conducting a stress free learning environment, and also helps students to actively participate in classroom activities. Auer (1995) believed in two types of C.S. The participant-related switching which focuses on language preferences and competences of the learners, and the