There is by now a widespread understanding in Italy about the fundamental role of validation of non-formal and informal learning in any educational policy aiming at lifelong learning and adult education, and there is almost unanimous consensus about the need and urgency to build up an integrated, general system for LLL, compatible with EU frameworks in this field, allowing and stimulating mobility between “channels” and “levels” of education. Despite such potentially favourable conditions among experts and the pressures due to the commitment to apply EU policies at national level, no such system has yet been implemented, for a number of complex reasons:
- political (different degrees of awareness and interest for LLL topics in different socio-political areas; lack of stability of commitment to LLL)
- structural, related to specific features of the Italian educational system (separation between VET and HET; weakness of AE and LLL in general; insufficient development of the competence-based and learning outcomes based approach)
- institutional (competences attributed to a number of different stakeholders and actors, causing different speed in the implementation of policies; legal value of qualifications)
- economic (budget cuts imposed by governmental financial policy, worsening the situation of limited resources invested in the innovation of the educational system)
- cultural (low acceptance among academics of the relevance of LLL and of the value of competences gained through experiential learning)
- contingent ( bad practice in the field of “validation” carried out mainly by private, and in some cases by public HE institutions
Governmental strategies: research carried out at EU and international level, when describing the Italian legal conditions and on-going initiatives in the field of LLL, regularly points out with resignation that in Italy the lack of a national legal framework for LLL represents the main obstacle to the development and implementation of an efficient LLL policy in all educational areas. Existing legal references are therefore represented by a few governmental or ministerial decrees, some agreements between the national government and local authorities, and between governmental boards (national and regional level) and social partners, some regional laws or decrees (e.g. those deliberated in Lombardy, Piedmont, Emilia-Romagna and Tuscany).
The most significant attempt to overcome this lack of an over-arching regulation for LLL was made in August 2007 by the government in charge which submitted a “Draft bill concerning Regulations for Lifelong Learning” (Schema di legge concernente: Norme in materia di Apprendimento permanente), aiming at providing general rules for all areas of education, compatible with corresponding EU developments, in view of the implementation of an integrated system of lifelong learning. The document adopts the current definitions for formal, informal and non-formal learning, in use in European educational policy, and defines a number of principles and criteria for recognition and certification of learning occurred in non-formal and informal contexts.
A general device for recognition is proposed which, starting from the “identification” of competences, leads to the “validation of acquired knowledge” conceived as official statement, based upon criteria of equity, transparency and quality, which “allows the certification of the set of knowledge, skills and competences owned by the individual learner”. The government assumes the task of providing “general regulations concerning the identification and validation of learning occurring in formal, informal and non formal contexts, in view of access to the system of school and higher education”.
As a consequence of political changes in the general elections of Autumn 2008, causing the change of government, the innovative contents of the draft bill submitted by the previous Prodi government did not receive any further attention. Nevertheless the proposal was presented again as a draft bill submitted to the Senate of the Republic on November 4th, 2008, by the senator Finocchiaro pleading for the adoption of a “National Plan for Lifelong Learning” and inviting the government, among other objectives, to define “a system of identification and validation of learning of an informal and non formal kind”.
In the presence of total parliamentary inertness and governmental inactivity in this field, the aims expressed by the Finocchiaro proposal were later taken over, updated and extended in the draft bill “based upon people’s initiative” (Proposta di legge di iniziativa popolare) entitled “Right of Lifelong Learning”, submitted by the trade union CGIL to the Chamber of Deputies in January 2010, after collecting 130 000 support signatures among citizens. In the long list of objectives in the fields of lifelong learning and adult education, the document includes certification of competences and recognition of non formal and informal learning inviting the government to establish by means of a legislative decree, within 18 months after approval of the law, the modes of “identification and validation” of such learning, in view of access to the system of institutionalized education and training. The certification of competences acquired through non formal and informal learning and their registration in the citizen’s personal “Educational passport” (Libretto formativo) is conceived as a right of citizens, to be guaranteed by the State according to EU regulations, and to be practically implemented with reference to the job descriptions and classifications included in the “Repertory of professional standards” (see below).
We must however consider that as of today the proposal has not even been discussed yet in Parliament and that the Parliament decision concerning the legitimacy of the plebiscite to be carried out for the approval is altogether uncertain. Approval of the law can therefore realistically not be expected to occur before 2012.
During the past three years no substantial changes in the legal reference framework for LLL – and consequently in official regulations for the validation of NF and IF learning – have occurred with respect to previous investigations. On the other hand, a few regulations approved in the meantime at regional level can be briefly mentioned here.
