The assumptions of sociolinguistics are contrasted with those of its more static predecessors in light of their potential for bearing on educational problems. The focus on variability with regard to sex, age, style, socioeconomic status, race, education is more akin to the dynamics of the linguistic and educational setting in which a child finds himself than structural or generative grammar were. This focus on variability gets to the heart of many school problems involving writing, reading, and talking. It bears on perplexing questions about how to delimit styles, how to effect acceptability in the language of others, how people set themselves off from each other through language, and how subtle variation between spoken and written language forms can cause problems in composition or reading. In the past, native language teaching has had to deal with these issues, but it has never before had the tools to do so. Sociolinguistic information can be used to rethink the education of teachers and the development of realistic instructional materials and techniques. Yet the effort is likely to be stymied unless careful attention is given to the lack of credibility of linguistics which past crimes have fostered, to the dynamics of educational change, and to developing less hostile attitudes toward education among sociolinguists. (Author)