Chatting with a group of prisoners over lunch at HMP Birmingham, any assumptions regarding academic aspirations were swiftly dismantled as the men discussed their educational experience behind bars.

The Category B men’s prison in Winson Green, just outside Birmingham city centre, is managed by G4S and holds 1,450 sentenced and remand prisoners. The deficit of basic skills within the UK prison population is a significant problem.

The Prison Reform Trust recently reported that “more than half (57 per cent) of people entering prison were assessed as having literacy skills expected of an 11 year old - more than three times higher than in the general adult population (15 per cent)”.

But the pressing issue for these particular prisoners pertained to the other end of the academic spectrum: a lack of challenging educational options at higher levels.

A prisoner serving his first sentence told me that he knew prison wasn’t for him, so he wanted to use his time constructively. He had completed all the courses available to him within the first year and has a number of years left inside. So what now?

His frustration was palpable. “Teach me engineering, let me learn to a high level - there aren’t enough engineers,” he says. “Teach me something useful in here that will give me something useful to do when I get out.”

Another prisoner explained that he had got into trouble shortly after finishing his degree. “I was studying at level 6 and in here they only go to level 2,” he explains. “It’s really hard to get up in the morning and stay motivated to improve myself. Prison doesn’t rehabilitate us. We rehabilitate ourselves.”

The chance to have such open conversations in this high-security environment was part of an event planned by The Institute of Ideas, an organisation that creates a range of opportunities for robust public debate to “challenge contemporary, knee-jerk orthodoxies”.

Its Debating Matters competition is an established project that has run since 2002 and works with more than 300 schools annually.

It is an intellectually challenging format, focused on 16- to 18-year-olds, which encourages independent thought. The emphasis of the competition is substance and in-depth knowledge, rather than traditional debate.

‘Frightened rabbits’

The prison version, Debating Matters Beyond Bars, is in its second year. The Institute of Ideas founder and director Claire Fox explains that she was concerned that it was “some sort of PR stunt” when the Ministry of Justice approached her about holding debate competitions within prisons. But once clear conditions were agreed, including the importance of prisoners being taken seriously, she agreed to explore the idea.

In the early stages of the project, there was a degree of cynicism from prisoners, some of whom saw it as yet another well-meaning initiative with no real value.

“When I first walked in,” Fox recalls, “there was a bunch of blokes sitting there cocksure, going, ‘This is a piece of piss, we’re gonna win.’ Then when we set up the debates, these two big blokes looked like frightened rabbits, absolutely terrified and shaking. They couldn’t get the words out.”

But as the training sessions developed, so did the participants’ confidence. The prisoners rose to the challenge, researched the topics, constructed complex opening speeches and well-considered arguments.

Fox continues: “One guy said to me, ‘What I’ve loved about this thing is that it teaches you to be moral. It’s not really about public speaking. It makes you realise that there’s more than one side to an argument’.”

The preparation for the competitions involves three training sessions, in which the Institute of Ideas team works with prisoners. The first looks at competition structure, debating techniques and construction of arguments. The group is given extensive, university-level reading materials on debate topics, in order to familiarise themselves prior to the second session, two weeks later. This time, teams are organised and encouraged to discuss debate topics in depth.

This year, the motions debated by teams in the semi-finals included “Sportspeople should act as role models” and “Space exploration is a waste of time and money”. The debates were held in front of an audience of prisoners, staff and invited guests were judged by a panel of top academics, respected journalists and political thinkers, who questioned the arguments and offered feedback.

The grand final follows the same structure. The Gym Team and the Education Team debate the motion: “In the digital age, we should not expect our online activities to remain private”. The event is another disposal of stereotypes, as a towering hulk with shaved head and a gallery of tattoos eloquently articulates an argument to crescendo, excelling in content and persuasive performance. His opponents’ argument is equally impressive, referencing post-modernist theorists, Aristotle and Article 8 of the Human Rights Bill.

This is the second attempt at holding the final of the competition, as the original planned date had to be called off because of safety concerns, after a seven-hour prison riot shortly before guests were scheduled to arrive.

However, the debate transcends its surroundings and as a guest it is very easy to forget where we are. As the winners are announced and recognition of individual contributors is celebrated with certificates and books as prizes, the shared experience is both collegiate in its seriousness and exhilarating in its intensity.

The Institute of Ideas is keen to explore the project with a number of prisons. Fox is also interested in developing the programme in youth offender institutions.

“It’s a way of remembering what education can be like,” she says. “Seeing the lightbulb moments for people stays with you.”

Sarah Simons works in colleges in the East Midlands, and is the director of UKFEchat