Classism

In the world of high school debate, classism is a silent yet persistent barrier that determines access, achievement, and endurance in the activity. Although debate is labeled as an open platform where the most rational arguments prevail, the truth is far more complicated, especially for debaters who come from under-resourced schools.

Quality coaching is essential to national-level success, but not all debaters have access to such coaching. As Poolesville High School senior Jeff Hou shared, "Our coach is simply an English teacher who lacks much debate experience. For serious national-level competition, we basically don't have a coach." Meanwhile, larger programs hire private coaches or have alumni networks that provide consistent judges and resources, which further widens the gap between schools.

But the differences continue. Expenses are another significant challenge. National competitions cost more than $1,000 in travel, hotel, judging, and registration fees, and even online competitions cost $200–$300, a challenge for many with a small budget for their school's debate team, forcing many students to pay out of pocket. As Jeff mentioned, "Cost is always in the back of your head. We can't go to as many tournaments, so we have to be strategic, while others don't face that struggle."

This disparity creates a cycle of exclusion. Large programs with institutions can partake in larger groups to share private resources and garner materials from backfiles. But smaller schools are left to fend for themselves, often overexerting themselves just for the chance to compete. Even the thought of competing against larger schools can become overwhelming. Jeff explains, "The lack of resources makes you question everything. The self-doubt lingers, it's like admitting defeat before it even happens."

Even tools intended to open debate up, like open-source Wikis and email chains, can inadvertently perpetuate class divisions. "A lot of smaller schools don't even know what the Wiki is," Jeff said. "It's just another obstacle that students who have fewer resources have to try and overcome.

Classism in debate is not always apparent; it does not often take the form of outright discrimination, but its impact is a structural division, only worsening access to debate and exacerbating other forms of marginalization. Yet still, it is among the least talked-about types of inequity in the activity. As long as we fail to acknowledge and act upon the influence of socioeconomic differences on access and success, the world of debate will go on rewarding privilege just as much as performance.