My personal development in literacy has not always been easy. In primary school I suffered from dyslexia. Additionally, my family moved several times and new school districts taught reading and writing using different methods. These difficulties meant that primary school was not as central to my literacy development as most students. My high school experience had much more influence on the creation of my literacy practices. 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. I learned more sophisticated literacy skills, improved speech, social confidence, and empowerment of ideas. As in every field, debaters have their own terminology that helps introduce members. in the community. Knowing and handling the terminology has allowed competitors to achieve great success in and out of events. Many terms are also used in other sophisticated academic environments. Thus, the successful use of this terminology by high school students was highly appreciated by higher education professionals and recruiters. Common terms include: rhetoric paradigm heredity speech workability stock issues A priori empirically status quo threshold counterintuitive threshold actuality impacts A priori affirmative comparative advantage workability solvability hegemonic resolution mutually exclusive refutation At first glance, these words seem quite common; however, they are not common in the vocabulary of an average high school student. These “buzz” words were essential to the expected communication style during debates, but a few strategically placed words often dazzled most high school teachers. Furthermore, the use of these terms also leads to a very stylized and sophisticated pattern of argument organization. Primarily, debaters focused on stock shows used this format to write "cases" or policy briefs. Stock issues include importance, harm, heredity, timeliness and solvency. Typically and loosely, the debate community refers to these questions using the acronym SHITS. When designing a file, all five elements must be present. High school debaters often refer to a chair analogy. The idea being that if one of the legs is missing, the chair will fall. Using these five elements creates a very sophisticated style of argumentation that is not typically used by the average person. The goal is to leave little room for doubt. The debater explains to the audience how it fits into the thematic area (current affairs), why this policy is important (importance and disadvantages), why it is time to act now, why the problem is not resolved (inherence/barrier inherent) and why your plan resolves the harms (solvency).