This article serves as a rebuttal to Jesse Colquit's article (CQ, Fall 1977) that charged current instructional language practices with racism and ethnocentrism. It is contended that current instructional methods emphasize the notion of social acceptability and adaptability, a goal designed to enhance the individual's exercise of his language rights. The confusion of “language” with “culture” led Colquit to make several erroneous and extreme positional statements in the original article. Current instructional practices do not exhibit racist or ethnocentric undertones; on the contrary, they demonstrate social utilitarianism designed to maximize each individual's personal and professional development.
The student's right to his own language: A response to colquit
Reprints and Corporate Permissions
Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?
To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:
Academic Permissions
Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?
Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:
If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.
Related Research Data
Related research
People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.
Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.
Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.