ODL has been considered in the past years and particularly in Italy a sort of second chance approach to education (that made it, almost inevitably, also a "second choice" solution to the eyes of most learners and teachers). The evolution of technology, demand and also supply makes absolutely evident, even to the most orthodox academics, that ODL is no longer necessarily associated to "worse" quality, and some evidence can be found that through individualisation, internationalisation, flexibility to address the needs of users, ODL can produce results of a better quality (at least as perceived by users) than conventional teaching, in which these three characteristics are not usually found as a "sufficient level".

Many years ago the ODL community knew already this, was convincing policy makers that additional effort should be put to support ODL development and was trying to convince users that they should trust ODL as a reasonable alternative or integration to classroom and work-based learning; but to the eyes of population at large and the majority of teachers and trainers ODL was still perceived as a not totally respectable way of teaching and learning, acceptable only if and when other forms were not accessible/available.

So, how has ODL gained so much credibility, at least compared with the recent past, in so few years? In the CALIBER-NET project has been developed a research related to "Different Paths towards ODL Legitimisation and Equivalence" assuming that certification of ODL products and services and recognition of titles achieved thorough ODL had been the two most important driving forces towards legitimisation of ODL as an equivalent to more consolidated ways of learning.

The exploration of the European scene and the emergence of a great number of "atypical cases" has suggested a shift of focus towards the broader and more interesting issue of how ODL has found/is finding its path to full legitimisation and equivalence to conventional education and training.

In fact recognition of titles achieved though ODL played a major role to show users policy support to Open Universities, but also the recognition of teachers training courses at a distance (as in the case of Universidade Aberta in Portugal) certainly convinced many teachers to take a more respectful attitude towards ODL.

Also the certification of ODL courses, materials and services, where existing (Emilia-Romagna, Germany plus several cases of certification by producers associations or users) can be a powerful way to reassure learners and teachers on a certain level of quality embedded in ODL products and services.

Other approach to the legitimisation of ODL, not directly linked with the concept of accreditation/certification, has been identified:

 

 

 

 the establishment of specialised consortia and institutions by the public authorities and/or by a group of respectable universities or training organisations (normally, anyhow with the support of the relevant public authorities and related funding). The cases of Consorzio Nettuno and of the Open Learning Foundation demonstrate how ODL has become a legitimate and "recognised" modality of achieving "Academic Titles" guaranteed by conventional Universities;

 

 

 

 

 the "de facto" acceptance of ODL as a legitimate way to be trained and to train people, by giving access to public funding to training providers and (in some cases) to learners wishing to use ODL has brought about a largely diffused new feeling that the wind was blowing towards ODL. The European Memorandum on ODL and the space explicitly and implicitly given to ODL in European Programmes gave an important contribution in this direction and were then followed by national authorities of many countries. Also the role of users in "de facto" acceptance of ODL cannot be underestimated: the examples of many British professional bodies and of German car industry are providing good evidence of its importance;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 finally, the unexpected trend that has definitely changed the level of legitimisation and respectability of ODL in the last five years has been the integration of ODL segments/modules into conventional education and training. This approach is quite different from the others because it is not concerning only specialised ODL providers or specialised consortia (although composed of conventional educational institutions), and has brought ODL into the "core business" of education and training bodies, has involved cohorts of teachers and trainers who were passive or hostile to ODL, has brought the ODL experience to the "normal" and "privileged" users of full time education and training. Pilot projects like HUMANITIES or regulatory measures such as those adopted by the Emilia-Romagna Regional Administration in the field of vocational and continuing training can well illustrate the impact of the integration approach on the respectability of ODL.

As a whole it can be concluded that European Countries have experienced several strategies and paths towards the legitimisation of ODL: every approach has produced some impact whatever the source of initiative was (policy makers, associations of ODL producers, organised users) The recent approach of integration of ODL into mainstream education and training seems, however, to produce very significant results both in extension and in the deepening of the levels of acceptance of ODL