Depends on what you mean by that. I’m not a linguist, but I’ve heard a lot of them speak, so I hope someone more qualified will correct me where I am wrong.

At an early age language needs to be taught in it’s present localized state to give a base structure for learning. With that language learning we need to teach structure of language locally and also more generally. Later in their learning, if we taught everyone in society the reality that linguists already know, that language changes and evolves over time and place, and teach language basics like how language itself works, we see better outcomes. The worst outcomes we see in language learning is when we teach only rote memorization of sounds, spelling, and rigid grammar. We can still teach that stuff, but it needs to be taught along side general language structures, language theory, and an understanding of practical realities to see better outcomes.

Whatever we do, language will always change rapidly over time. It’s better to teach in a way that prepares people for the fluidity of language, than to teach people only the rigid structures that will inevitably change.

Language is largely not prescriptive, no matter how much people want it to be. Prescriptivism is like holding your hand out to stop a river, it completely misunderstands how language flows over time.