Regular and substantive interaction, or RSI, is not only important for quality online course design, but a requirement for federal financial aid eligibility for every online course. This resource explains what RSI is, why it matters, how it fits into quality online course design, what reviewers look for in an audit, and five things you can build into your course this to ensure RSI happens.
What Is RSI?
Regular and substantive interaction (RSI) is the federally defined, instructor-initiated interaction that a distance education course must provide between an instructor and students (34 C.F.R. § 600.2). It is what distinguishes an online course from a correspondence course, and it has two required parts: regular and substantive interaction. A course must demonstrate both, together, throughout the term.
Regular Interaction
Regular interaction is predictable, scheduled, and sustained across the whole course, meaning it is not clustered at the start or saved for the end, but happens throughout a course. It is instructor-initiated: the institution monitors student engagement, and the instructor reaches out proactively, rather than responding or reacting to students.
Substantive Interaction
Substantive Interaction are interactions that engage students in teaching, learning, and assessment. A quality online course must include at least two of the following, and they must be instructor-initiated:
- Direct instruction — live, synchronous instruction where instructor and students are online together at the same time
- Responding to and expanding on students’ academic questions
- Assessment and personalized, improvement-focused feedback
- Facilitating discussion of course content
- Other approved instructional activity aligned with program or accreditor expectations
A grade alone or auto grading alone is not substantive interaction. The Department of Education is explicit that an automated system responding to student input is interaction with a computer, not with an instructor.
Why It Matters
It is a Compliance Requirement
Without documented RSI, a distance education course can be reclassified as a correspondence course. Why is that an issue? Because correspondence courses are not eligible for federal financial aid. This is a course-level requirement: both regular and substantive interaction must be present in every online section. Competency-based and self-paced formats draw even greater scrutiny, because it is easier for instructor presence to fade from the design.
It is Quality Online Teaching
RSI is not only a box to check. Feedback is quality teaching: timely, specific feedback helps a student understand a concept well enough to apply it on the next attempt, and consistent, visible instructor presence supports motivation, confidence, and retention. Compliance and quality share the same goal; that a course built to satisfy RSI is, in practice, a course built to help students learn.
How RSI Is Part of Quality Online Course Design
RSI holds up best when it is planned into the course rather than added after the fact. This means RSI should be there by design, not happenstance. In a well-designed course:
- The syllabus states, in plain language, when and how students can expect interaction (e.g., “Feedback within 3–5 business days,” “Office hours every Monday, 4–5pm CST, via [link]”).
- Instructor touchpoints such as announcements, feedback, discussion posts, are spread evenly across the term instead of clustered at the start or the end.
- Assignments are built to require interaction such as iterative drafts, discussion prompts, scaffolded projects, rather than one-way content delivery followed by an auto-graded quiz or solely focused on peer feedback.
- Feedback loops are visible: a student can see how earlier feedback shaped a later assignment or revision.
Designed this way, RSI becomes a property of the whole course. It is visible in the syllabus, the weekly rhythm, and the assignment structure, rather than something one strong week of feedback can retroactively supply. It is built into the ongoing cadence of the course itself.
What Is Looked For in an Audit
Reviewers typically review Canvas activity and syllabus or assignment language together, and they are looking for a pattern of engagement over time, not a single artifact. In Canvas, that often means checking for a syllabus, announcements, discussion topics, the balance of auto-graded versus instructor-graded work, and timestamps for both instructor and student activity. Particular attention is paid to any gap of two or more weeks without instructor presence. A sample is provided below, but the table is by no means comprehensive.
| What Auditors Look For | Red Flags |
|---|---|
| Timestamped instructor posts spread across multiple weeks | Long gaps (2+ weeks) with no instructor presence |
| Differentiated feedback tied to each student’s own work and the rubric | Generic feedback (“Good job”) or unedited auto-generated comments |
| Discussion facilitation that probes, redirects, and synthesizes | One-way announcements with no follow-up or engagement |
| Instructor-initiated outreach to quiet or struggling students | Interaction only occurs when a student reaches out first |
| Grading and feedback distributed across the term | Interaction only occurs when a student reaches out first |
| Syllabus language stating specific interaction cadence | Course could be completed via readings/videos + auto-graded quizzes alone |
A course meets RSI when interaction is instructor-initiated, academically substantive, occurs regularly across the whole term, is documented and auditable, and is consistent across sections of the same course. If there is no visible pattern of instructor-initiated, predictable, substantive interaction, RSI may be found lacking. For additional information, review the RSI Evidence list from the Universities of Wisconsin Office of Online & Professional Learning Resources.
Five Things to Build into Online Classes Now
Each of these can be added to a current course without a redesign. Adapt the language to your own voice. What matters to reviewers and to students is that it is specific, instructor-authored, and consistent. In addition to this resource, review the RSI Instructor Checklist & Best Practices from the Universities of Wisconsin Office of Online & Professional Learning Resources.
Put a specific interaction cadence in your syllabus
Name the exact turnaround times and touchpoints students can expect, rather than describing them in general terms. This single change gives students a clear standard and gives you documented, auditable language.
Sample Syllabus Language: “I will respond to content questions within 48 business hours. Assessment feedback will be provided within 3–5 business days. Office hours are every Monday, 4:00–5:00pm CST, via [Zoom link].”
Post a short, instructor-initiated weekly announcement
One or two announcements a week — previewing the week, naming a pattern you noticed in student work, and pointing to a resource — does more for regular interaction than any single office-hours block, because it is visible, dated, and repeats across the term.
Weekly announcement template: “Hello [Class], great engagement this week, particularly around [topic]. Heading into [Week X], we’re shifting to [focus]. A pattern I’ve noticed: [common question or gap]. I’ve posted a resource in [location] to address this. Post questions in the Q&A forum.”
Give feedback that names the student’s own work and points forward
Feedback within 3–5 business days that references a specific example from the submission and ties to a rubric or grading criterion clears the substantive-interaction bar; “Good work” or unedited auto-generated comments do not, even if a grade is posted promptly.
Assessment feedback sample template: “[Name], your work on [topic] shows clear command of [skill/concept], especially [specific example]. To level up, sharpen your argument in [section] by connecting explicitly to [rubric criterion]. See my rubric note for a concrete suggestion.”
Reach out before a student asks, especially when they’ve gone quiet
Instructor-initiated outreach to a student who has missed activities or stopped logging in is one of the clearest markers of RSI, and one of the easiest to skip when a term gets busy. A short check-in, sent proactively, satisfies a requirement that reactive-only replies cannot.
Sample Student Outreach Template: “Hi [Name], I noticed you haven’t participated in discussion X this week / haven’t submitted an assessment since [date], and wanted to check in. If anything is preventing you from participating, please reach out. Here’s a suggestion for getting back on track: [specific step]. UWM support structures and I are here to help.”
Facilitate Discussion Instead of Only Grading
Posting a prompt and returning only to assign a grade does not demonstrate active facilitation. A Socratic follow-up or a mid-week synthesis post that is spread across more than one login session shows both regular presence and substantive engagement with student ideas.
Sample discussion facilitation template: “[Name], you’ve identified [concept] well. To go deeper: how does your argument hold up when we apply [Module X principle]? I’d push you to consider whether [peer’s point] supports or complicates your claim.” Mid-week synthesis: “I’m seeing two themes emerge across your posts this week: [theme 1] and [theme 2]. Here’s how they connect to [learning outcome]…”
A Note on AI
AI tools can support your workflow, but they can’t stand in for the instructor for RSI purposes. AI-generated discussion replies fail the instructor-presence standard, and auto-feedback without instructor commentary does not meet the substantive threshold. Any AI-assisted grading or feedback process you do use should be disclosed to students and should follow UWM AI guidance.