In this article we critically evaluate the case made by proponents of academic language (AL) that AL is functionally necessary for schooling due to specific functional advantages of AL. We consider three examples of AL introduced by AL proponents in order to show (1) that AL proponents have been too quick to accept the ALH, (2) that functional advantages of AL can be accomplished with non-AL varieties and 3) that AL may, in fact, be dysfunctional within the domain of schooling. We briefly describe the language ideological processes by which AL has been naturalized as appropriate to the domain of education while the functional potential of non-AL forms in schooling is obviated (noted by Halliday 2004). We then consider the work of M. A. K. Halliday, the researcher most commonly cited as providing justification for the ALH (esp. Halliday 2004), elaborating his critique of AL while also showing how this critique has been ignored by AL proponents citing his work. In closing we point to some implications of these findings for creating more equitable educational practices regarding academic language.