Italy mandates live delivery and staff ratios for online degrees

Rectors are divided on Italy’s decree governing remote learning, with some fearing a negative impact on enrolments while others argue the measures will boost quality.

The move comes after a surge in online-only enrolments in Italy from around 40,000 in 2012 to more than 222,000 a decade later – a 410 per cent increase.

Among the most notable aspects of the decree is the introduction of a minimum quota for “the synchronous delivery of lessons”: at least 20 per cent of lessons must be live, rather than pre-recorded.

Exams, meanwhile, must be taken in person at either the university’s office or at examination centres, where “at least two teachers of the subject” are present, with exemptions made for “students with certified disabilities” or in “temporary emergency situations”.

The decree also establishes the ratio of students to permanent teaching staff: in scientific or technological fields, one teacher is required for every 150 students, while the ratio for the humanities is one to 200.  

“During the pandemic and after the health emergency, online universities have seen exponential growth,” said Anna Maria Bernini, the Italian universities minister. “They were the answer to a demand. The need today is for all recognised universities, online and in person, to respond to this demand in the same way, guaranteeing the quality of the educational offering.”

Giovanni Cannata, rector of Universitas Mercatorum, said the new measures “will strengthen quality standards regarding distance learning”. As his institution has already boosted staff recruitment and offers more than 60 in-person exam locations, it has “already followed the new measures introduced by the decree”, he said.

Pegaso University rector Pierpaolo Limone said Professor Bernini “deserves recognition for being the first to take concrete steps toward regulating distance learning and engaging all relevant stakeholders in the discussion”. “Nevertheless, I believe they fall short of achieving their intended goals,” he said.

While the live teaching quota was intended to “promote engagement and interactivity”, Professor Limone said, “there is no scientific evidence to suggest that this specific percentage is optimal for learning, nor that live online teaching is inherently superior to other forms of learning activities”.

The requirement to sit exams in person, he continued, “addresses concerns about academic integrity but overlooks the fact that cheating can occur even in traditional settings”. The new measures, Professor Limone said, “may inadvertently undermine the flexibility that is the defining strength of distance learning, especially for students who are geographically remote or balancing work and family responsibilities”.

Giampiero di Plinio, rector of Leonardo Da Vinci Telematic University, shared similar concerns. “In-person exams are a major obstacle for our type of students,” he said, listing as examples “workers, the elderly, people with few means who cannot afford residence or continuous travel to the exam locations”.

The decree requirements “will increase our costs and force us to pass them on to our students,” Professor Di Plinio said. “A rigid application of the measures would also significantly reduce enrolments or career continuations at [online] universities.”

emily.dixon@timeshighereducation.com