CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,829Multilingual Education and PolicyCritical Race Theory in EducationLinguistics and Education Research

Undoing Appropriateness: Raciolinguistic Ideologies and Language Diversity in Education.

Flores, Nelson, Rosa, Jonathan·2015·Harvard Educational Review
DOI 10.17763/0017-8055.85.2.149
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In this article, Nelson Flores and Jonathan Rosa critique appropriateness-based approaches to language diversity in education. Those who subscribe to these approaches conceptualize standardized linguistic practices as an objective set of linguistic forms that are appropriate for an academic setting. In contrast, Flores and Rosa highlight the raciolinguistic ideologies through which racialized bodies come to be constructed as engaging in appropriately academic linguistic practices. Drawing on theories of language ideologies and racialization, they offer a perspective from which students classified as long-term English learners, heritage language learners, and Standard English learners can be understood to inhabit a shared racial positioning that frames their linguistic practices as deficient regardless of how closely they follow supposed rules of appropriateness. The authors illustrate how appropriateness-based approaches to language education are implicated in the reproduction of racial normativity by expecting language-minoritized students to model their linguistic practices after the white speaking subject despite the fact that the white listening subject continues to perceive their language use in racialized ways. They conclude with a call for reframing language diversity in education away from a discourse of appropriateness toward one that seeks to denaturalize standardized linguistic categories.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.17763/0017-8055.85.2.149

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Raciolinguistic ideologies perpetuate stigmatization of the language practices of racialized bilinguals and multilinguals.

    “As Flores and Rosa (2015) point out, raciolinguistic ideologies perpetuate stigmatization of the language practices of racialized bilinguals and multilinguals.”

    From Translanguaging as a political stance: implications for English language education (2022) · cites this paper as Flores and Rosa 2015

  • The notion of academic English is not a set of empirically and objectively verifiable linguistic features, but a category and a categorizing device that emerges as part of broader raciolinguistic ideologies that position racialized and minoritized learners as illegitimate language users, linguistically deficient and unacademic.

    “The problem with the notion of academic English is that it is not a set of empirically and objectively verifiable linguistic features, but, as Flores and Rosa (2015) point out, a category and a categorizing device that emerges as part of broader raciolinguistic ideologies that position”

    From Translanguaging as a political stance: implications for English language education (2022) · cites this paper as Flores and Rosa 2015

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Flores, N., & Rosa, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • University of Massachusetts Amherst (US)
ORCID
Venue
Harvard Educational Review
Publisher
Harvard Education Publishing Group
Published
2015-06
Volume
85
Issue
2
Pages
149-171
ISSN
  • 0017-8055 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-5045
DOI
10.17763/0017-8055.85.2.149
OpenAlex
W768267441
Cited by
2,829
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 341 · 2025: 473 · 2024: 383 · 2023: 327 · 2022: 318 · 2021: 311 · 2020: 284 · 2019: 194 · 2018: 109 · 2017: 54 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 8 · 2013: 1
FWCI
272.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Harvard Educational Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Multilingual Education and Policy
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Critical Race Theory in Education
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Linguistics and Education Research
Keywords
raciolinguistic ideologies, language diversity in schools, linguistic appropriateness, language ideology, racialization, long-term English learners, heritage language learners, language standardization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review