Magdalena Fellner is Senior Researcher at the International Center for Higher Education Research at the University of Kassel. Between March and December 2026, she is a Visiting Researcher at the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning (UIL) in Hamburg.
© Christiane Marwecki
Although education is recognized as a fundamental human right under international conventions such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), opportunities, particularly at the post-secondary level, remain scarce in practice. In many countries, only a very small proportion of incarcerated individuals participate in formal higher education programmes, despite the fact that a substantially larger share meets the eligibility criteria for such study. If we are serious about equity, this must change.
Yet, when I tell people that I conduct research on prison–university programmes for people deprived of their liberty, the reaction is often one of surprise, with some expressing doubt about whether such opportunities should exist or whether punishment alone should take precedence. Such responses reveal a persistent misconception: that prisons exist primarily for punishment, and that punishment alone leads to rehabilitation.
This view stands in clear contrast to international human rights frameworks. The International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) emphasizes that the essential aim of imprisonment is reformation and social rehabilitation. Similarly, the Nelson Mandela Rules underline that imprisonment should reduce reoffending and support reintegration. Given that most people in detention will eventually be released, reintegration is not a peripheral concern, but a central objective.
So why does the idea of education in prison still provoke scepticism? Part of the answer lies in deeply ingrained narratives that divide the world into ‘good’ and ‘bad’, leaving little room for change. A deficit-oriented perspective reduces people to their offences, obscuring both context and the potential for change. Yet research consistently shows that socialization, environment and life experiences shape behaviour in profound ways.
In many contexts, individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds encounter exclusionary mechanisms long before any contact with the criminal justice system. Rather than receiving support, they are often pushed out. Lacking resources and influence, marginalised groups face a higher likelihood of imprisonment, harsher punishments and longer sentences than those in more privileged positions. Patterns of overrepresentation of minorities in prisons around the world illustrate how unequal access to resources translates into unequal outcomes within the justice system.
Research consistently demonstrates that participation in higher education in prison is associated with significantly lower rates of reoffending. However, its impact extends much further. Education can transform how individuals see themselves and others, foster meaningful relationships and improve quality of life – even for those serving long sentences. For some, it is a life-changing experience; for others, it fulfils a deep intellectual need. Moreover, individuals who study while in prison often go on to contribute positively to their communities after release, helping to prevent others from following similar paths.
Expanding access to higher education in prisons is not only an educational issue, but also a matter of social and reparatory justice. Implementation often fails due to political resistance and practical barriers, such as limited digital infrastructure, strict security regulations restricting internet access, additional workloads for prison staff, and a lack of stable institutional partnerships between prisons and universities. However, where such efforts are made, the results are promising.
At the Bard Prison Initiative in the United States, for instance, participants perform at levels comparable to, or even exceeding, those of students at traditional universities. In Germany and Austria, projects such as elis (E-Learning in Prisons) demonstrate how digital solutions and cross-institutional collaboration can increase access even in restrictive environments.
Advocating for higher education in prisons ultimately requires rethinking justice itself. Education is not a panacea; it cannot compensate for the broader structural conditions that contribute to crime. But it is a crucial part of a more humane and effective approach to incarceration. These reflections invite us to reconsider society’s responsibilities towards those who are incarcerated. Higher education in prison, then, has the potential to offer profound learning opportunities, not only to individuals, but to society as a whole.
