My personal literacy development has not always been easy. In elementary school I struggled with dyslexia. Additionally, my family moved several times and new school districts began teaching reading and writing using different methods. These challenges made elementary school not as central to my literacy development as most students. My high school career was much more influential in creating my literacy practices. More specifically, my experience as a member of my high school debate team really influenced the literacy practices I use today. My high school debate team placed me in a literacy community, unlike most high school students, they taught me more sophisticated literacy skills, improved speech, social confidence, and idea empowerment. As in any field, debaters have their own terminology that helps initiate members into the community. Knowing and manipulating the terminology made the contestants very successful in and out of the rounds. Many terms are also used in other sophisticated academic circles. Therefore, the effective use of this terminology by high school students has been highly appreciated by higher education professionals and recruiters. Common terms include: rhetorical paradigm inherence discourse workability reservation issues A priori empirically status quo threshold limit counter intuitive actuality impacts A priori affirmative comparative advantage practicability hegemonic solvency resolution mutually exclusive refutation On face value these words seem quite common; however, they are not common in the vocabulary of the average high school student. These “buzz” words were essential to the expected communication style in debates, but a few strategically placed words often dazzled most high school teachers. Furthermore, the use of these terms also leads to a highly stylized and sophisticated organizational model for argumentation. Primarily, debaters focused on equity issues have used this format to write "cases" or policy briefs. Equity issues include meaning, harm, inherence, topicality, and solvency. Commonly and crudely, the debate community refers to these issues using the acronym SHITS. When designing a case all five elements must be present. High school debates often refer to the chair analogy. The idea is that if one of the legs is missing the chair falls. Using these five elements creates a very sophisticated style of argumentation, not typically used by the average person. The goal is to leave little room for doubt. The speaker explains to the audience how it fits into the topic area (current events), why this policy is important (significance and harm), why now is the time to act, why the problem is not being addressed (inherent/inherent barrier), and why your plan resolves the damages (solvency).