RSI
What is Regular and Substantive Interaction?
RSI refers to ongoing, meaningful interaction between instructors and students in online courses. This includes regular instructor engagement, such as providing feedback, answering questions, facilitating student-to-student interactions, and guiding learning activities.
RSI helps ensure that online learning is active, supported, and instructor-led rather than a collection of course materials for students to complete independently.
Further Reading
WICHE Cooperative for Educational Technologies. (2016, September 30). Interpreting regular and substantive interaction.
U.S. Department of Education. (2020, May). Distance learning and innovation: Final regulations—Fact sheet.
Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges. (n.d.). Regular and substantive interaction (RSI) [Canvas course]. Canvas.
RSI Components
Regular and Substantive Interaction (RSI)
Main Components
Frequency
Regular interaction involves consistent engagement between faculty and students. Aim for a minimum of two substantive interactions per week.
Accessibility
Interactions take various forms to accommodate diverse student needs and preferences. This includes captioned live meetings, as well as accessible asynchronous communication via email, discussion forums, and/or audio recordings with transcripts.
Quality
Substantive interaction refers to meaningful engagement that contributes to the student's learning experience. It involves more than just surface-level communication and should be individualized, not automated, to meet students' needs.
Initiation
Both faculty and students should actively initiate interactions to ensure balanced engagement.
Timeliness
Feedback on assignments or responses to student-initiated interactions should occur within a reasonable time-frame for students to apply learning in their assignments.
What constitutes "substantive interaction" in an online course?
Meets RSI Standards
Varied assessments including individualized feedback
Instructor-led discussions aligned with course content
Weekly announcements discussing content
Rubrics used along with individualized feedback
Does Not Meet RSI Standards
Auto-graded quizzes with no feedback
Video lectures without student-to-student or student-to-instructor engagement
Weekly announcements with due date reminders
Rubrics used as a checklist for assignment criteria
Please note: These teaching strategies are totally okay to do, they just don't "count" as RSI according to the Department of Education definition.
Learn more: Read the U.S. Department of Education's Summary of Distance Education and Innovation.
Ready to reflect on your course? Use the RSI rubric to see how you're excelling!
Here is a sample rubric to evaluate regular and substantive interaction in an online course. An Excel file with this rubric and a version for self-assessment are available upon request: elearning@seattlecolleges.edu
Frequency of Interaction
| Criteria | Excelling | Meeting | Almost There | Needs Improvement |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Instructor-to-student interactions | Instructor consistently initiates substantive interactions at least three to four times a week. | Instructor initiates substantive interactions two to three times a week. | Instructor initiates substantive interactions one to two times a week. | Instructor rarely initiates interactions (less than once a week), or interactions were automated before the term began. |
| Student-to-student interactions | Students consistently engage in meaningful discussions or collaborative activities with each other that go beyond one or two correspondences per occurrence (i.e. more than one reply in a particular conversation). | Students engage in meaningful discussions or collaborative activities with each other regularly to explore course content more deeply. | Students regularly engage in discussions or activities, but interactions lack depth or are not related to content. | Little to no student-to-student engagement observed. |
Substantive Contributions by Instructor
| Criteria | Excelling | Meeting | Almost There | Needs Improvement |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Substantive feedback from instructor | Instructor provides individualized feedback on assignments and discussions and offers opportunities for students to respond to feedback. | Instructor provides individualized feedback on assignments and discussions that contribute to the student learning experience. | Instructor provides feedback on assignments and discussions but feedback lacks depth or is not individualized. | Feedback provided is superficial, automated, or absent. |
| Facilitation of active learning | Instructor encourages critical thinking, problem-solving, and reflection through activities with individualized intervention. | Instructor encourages critical thinking, problem-solving, and reflection through activities. | Facilitates some active learning opportunities but lacks variety or depth. | Provides limited opportunities for active learning. |
Interaction Timeliness
| Criteria | Excelling | Meeting | Almost There | Needs Improvement |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clear expectations regarding response times | Response times are clearly communicated in multiple prominent places within the course. | Response times are clearly communicated in a prominent place within the course. | Response times are vaguely communicated and difficult to find. | There is no indication of how long a student might wait to hear back from the instructor. |
| Timeliness of instructor responses to students | Instructor responds to student inquiries within 24 hours. | Instructor responds to student inquiries within two days. | Instructor responds to student inquiries within three or more days. | Instructor responses are consistently delayed beyond a week. |
| Timeliness of assignment feedback by instructor | Feedback on assignments is given with plenty of time for students to apply feedback in following assignments. | Feedback on assignments is given with some time for students to apply feedback in following assignments. | Feedback is given with only a small amount of time for students to apply feedback in following assignments. | Feedback is given with no time for students to apply feedback in following assignments. |
Accessibility and Flexibility
| Criteria | Excelling | Meeting | Almost There | Needs Improvement |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accessibility of course materials | Course materials are well organized and exceed accessibility standards (WCAG 2.0 AA). | Course materials are well organized and comply with accessibility standards (WCAG 2.0 AA). | Course materials are somewhat accessible but may lack organization or accessibility features. | Course materials are difficult to navigate and have several accessibility barriers. |
| Flexibility of engagement methods and due dates | Instructor provides various avenues and modalities for students to engage with course content and complete/revise assignments. Due dates provide flexibility. | Major assignments and content include various avenues and modalities for student engagement. There are opportunities for flexibility in due dates. | Few assignments or content are available in various modalities for student engagement. Due dates are generally not flexible unless requested by the student. | Most assignments and content are provided in only one modality. All due dates are non-negotiable. |