FOR MANY people the idea of speaking to an audience is the stuff of nightmares. Imagine, then, as a sixth-former, taking part in a debate in front of a panel of adult experts who first question you rigorously and, later, having heard your responses to points from the audience and opposition, appraise your performance in the starkest of terms. Were you and your team-mate sloppy about your preparation, slow to answer important objections, incoherent in your reasoning? If so, they will be sure to tell you.

The Institute of Ideas (IOI) and Pfizer Schools Debating Competition is no forum for a faintheart. It aims to reinvent debate as a means of exploring ideas rather than a showcase for wit and cleverness. The contest, which holds its final at Tate Britain on March 6 for the winners of eight regional heats in England, Wales and Scotland, has largely attracted schools with little or no tradition of public speaking. Entrants, aged 16, 17 or 18, work in teams of two.

Claire Fox, director of the IOI, which organised the competition, makes no apology for the demands it makes on those who take part. “There are a lot of self-esteem initiatives in education which we are rather nervous about,” she says. “The subtext is that young people are unable to take serious criticism without it damaging them. Come on! They are tougher than that. Don’t patronise them.

“The Pop Idol moment when the judges tell the pupils what they thought of their performance is an immensely important part of the competition. It is very tense but you can see the teenagers really rising to the occasion. It doesn’t put them off — if anything it makes them determined to do better.”

That is a point borne out by the experience of some of those who have taken part so far. Tom Gartrell, 17, in the upper sixth at Graveney School in Tooting, South London, says: “It was a bit scary but it made me realise that I will not just shrivel up and die if someone criticises me. I can use it constructively. You are going to have to take criticism if you are going to get anywhere.”

Nicholas Barnett, 17, in the upper sixth at University College School, North London, says: “It is bad for the ego, but it assists us in developing our skills.”

Ian Chapman, also 17 and from UCS, adds: “Instead of just debating against the other team, you were also debating against three intelligent, older judges. In that sense it was much more challenging than other competitions. You were not setting out to beat the other team’s arguments but to justify your own.”

One distinctive element of the Debating Matters contest is that, on the whole, participants believe in their case and are passionate about making it. David Perks, head of physics at Graveney School, came up with the idea for the competition after the publication by Hodder Murray of a series of books on contentious issues, such as “alternative medicine is a con” and “animals should have rights just as human beings do”.

Having found that his pupils were frustrated by the way in which rhetoric rather than earnest discussion of serious issues held sway in other debating contests, he proposed that the books should form the basis of a new national debating competition, a suggestion that was seized on by the IOI. The format was devised and a pilot contest run in 2002.

Those who have taken part, and their teachers, agree that the main benefit is a huge gain in confidence. Sofie Habib, 16, from Graveney School, previously had a mild phobia about speaking in public. “It was my largest fear,” she says. “When I stood up I was terrified and shaking, but I wanted to get my points across and by the time I finished I wasn’t frightened of speaking in front of a large audience any more.

” Richard Swan, an English teacher at Harvey Grammar School in Folkestone, which has reached the finals, says: “The pupils get the self-confidence which comes from commanding their territory, holding their own against questioning by professionals.

“There is also an increase in their ability to develop ideas. These are important gains as they enter the adult world.”

The open-ended nature of the topics allows students to develop their research skills, too. Lucie Mullany and Francis Boorman, both 17, formed the Graveney School team proposing the motion: “Conceptual art is not real art”.

“They know my name at Tate Modern now and ask how I’m doing,” says Mullany. I was in there for 16 or 17 hours over one weekend.”

Boorman even managed to persuade Camberwell College of Art to put on its own debate on the topic, with professional artists stating their views, to which all schools taking part in the South London heat were invited.

“He chatted them up, and they responded,” says Perks. “People involved in this are getting the confidence to see they can set things up, do things which go far beyond taking part in the debate itself. It is an experience that transforms them.”