2.1 Introduction

This chapter first introduces the SUNY Course Quality Review (OSCQR) rubric, which has been used by FHSU to assure the quality of online courses in the past years. The OSCQR rubric will continue to be used to guide collaborative course design between instructional designers and faculty. If faculty work independently design their online courses, we encourage faculty to self-assess their courses by referring to objectives specified in Essential Design and Advanced Design in the new Course Review Scorecard. As announced by Barth (March 6, 2025), the Course Review Scorecard will replace the OSCQR rubric as the official course-level scorecard of OLC to evaluate and improve the design, course delivery, and overall quality of online and blended courses (Barth, March 6, 2025). The big difference between OSCQR rubric and the Course Review Scorecard is that the latter addresses course delivery. Faculty are advised to use the objectives specified in Course Delivery in the Scorecard to guide their teaching practices.

According to WCET (2023), RSI compliance mattered to faculty because no one wants to be the reason that their college are not reaccredited. But implementing RSI is not just to meet federal requirements. RSI requirements regarding interactions benefits faculty and students and improves the quality of online courses. Online students often complain about lack of interactions with their instructor which won’t be an issue in on-campus courses. To support online student’s success, it’s essential for faculty to understand what is RSI requirements and how to ensure RSI in their online teaching.

2.2 The OSCQR Rubric

This chapter first introduces the SUNY Course Quality Review (OSCQR) rubric, which has been used by FHSU to assure the quality of online courses in the past years. The quality of online course design directly relate to student success in one online course. To ensure instructional consistency, academic rigor, and student success, universities often rely on course design rubrics.

2.2.1 Why OSCQR?

Among the prominent options are Quality Matters (QM) and the OSCQR (Open SUNY Course Quality Review) rubric. FHSU first adopted Quality Matters (QM) and then adopted OSCQR rubric several years ago. While all two offer frameworks for evaluating online course design, FHSU have switched to OSCQR for the following reasons.

Open access and customizability. One of OSCQR’s most compelling advantages is that it is openly licensed under a Creative Commons license. This open-access model allows us to freely use, adapt, and customize the rubric to fit our specific needs without incurring costs or licensing restrictions. In contrast, Quality Matters is a proprietary system that requires membership fees and limits customization, which can be a barrier for us with limited budgets or those seeking more autonomy.

Emphasis on continuous improvement. Unlike Quality Matters (QM), which was used by FHSU previously for summative or certification-driven review processes, OSCQR’s formative approach is more aligned with FHSU seeking to foster a culture of reflection, flexibility, continuous improvement, and innovative teaching in online course design and delivery. This is especially appealing to us who focus on cultivating faculty buy-in and development, rather than merely enforcing a standardized model for all courses. OSCQR is explicitly designed for formative review, emphasizing continuous improvement over compliance or certification.The rubric emphasizes continuous improvement, which is used to help you identify areas for improvement instead of judging your course. It encourages instructors and instructional designers to engage in iterative course design process.

Detailed, actionable Standards. The OSCQR rubric includes 50 standards that are granular and practical with each standard coming with explanations and examples that clarify intent and provide guidance for implementation. While QM also provides well-developed standards, OSCQR’s plain-language descriptors and practical examples often make it more approachable for faculty who are new to online teaching or instructional design.

Alignment with regular and substantive interaction (RSI). OSCQR 4.1 has been updated to include standards aligned with federal RSI requirements, ensuring that FHSU meet U.S. Department of Education expectations for interaction in distance education. This built-in compliance readiness is a significant advantage, especially for FHSU that must maintain eligibility for federal financial aid. While QM has made efforts to align with RSI, OSCQR provides more explicit indicators and language that address it, easing the administrative burden on faculty and instructional designers.

In summary, while Quality Matters offer valuable frameworks for ensuring online course quality, the OSCQR Rubric stands out for its openness, flexibility, formative approach, and practical alignment with regulatory and pedagogical needs. For FHSU prioritizing affordability, faculty engagement, and continuous improvement, OSCQR offers a compelling alternative that aligns with modern teaching and learning goals.

2.2.2 Details about OSCQR Rubric

The SUNY Online Course Quality Review (OSCQR) Rubric is an openly licensed course review tool developed by SUNY Online in collaboration with SUNY campuses. It is designed to ensure that online and blended courses are learner-centered, providing inclusive learning experiences that prioritize learners’ needs, goals, and preferences. This tool aims to help faculty regularly review and improve their online courses to reflect best practices. The rubric was developed based on the Community of Inquiry model, the Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education, Adult Learning Theory, and Bloom’s Taxonomy. The OSCQR rubric provides standards for faculty to follow when designing a new online course or redesigning existing ones. Faculty can use the rubric to self-assess their courses and make improvements.

The Version OSCQR 4.0 rubric includes six sections describing essential course design elements, as shown in Figure 2-1.

Section 1: Overview and Information: It includes standards for a course overview and important information that should be provided to online learners. To meet the standards in this section, faculty should provide clear and welcoming instructions to help learners effectively navigate the course, understand expectations, and access the necessary support and resources for a successful online learning experience. All the standards help faculty ensure clear, comprehensive, and easily accessible information about the course structure, expectations, policies, and resources right from the start.

The OSCQR overview and Information section provides a list of the standards within its section. Faculty can click on each standard to access varied resources, including:

• explanations of that standard in paragraphs,
• explanations of that standard in a YouTube video,
• how that standard supports RSI,
• general suggestions for how to meet the standard,
• examples,
• related resources

Section 2: Technology and Tools. It includes standards for effective integration of technology and tools in online courses. Standards within this section ensure that learners have the necessary technical skills and support to engage in designed courses. This section emphasizes clear communication of required skills, timely scaffolding of skill development, easy access to frequently used tools, inclusion of privacy policy links, and adherence to accessibility standards. To meet the requirements of this section, faculty can provide cleaner instructions related to technology and tools that they want their learners to use in the course, reduce technical barriers, and create inclusive and transparent learning environments.

You can view standards and resources for this section here: Technology and Tools

Section 3: Design and Layout. It includes standards for ensuring clarity, readability, and accessibility of online courses. An online course should be visually engaging, easy to navigate, and provide an inclusive learning environment where learners focus on the content and activities rather than struggling to find information or understand structure. By following the standards in this section, faculty can create online courses that are well-designed, leading to better engagement, retention, and learning outcomes.

You can access standards and resources for this section here: Design and Layout

Section 4: Content and Activities. It includes standards for ensuring diverse and accessible course content and activities to create engaging learning experiences. All the standards in this section help faculty foster an inclusive and interactive learning environment. To meet the standards, faculty could present content in lecture videos, audio files, online resources, and readings. Faculty could facilitate discussion activities, group projects, group presentations, and activities in which students can apply their knowledge, demonstrate skills, and develop critical thinking, scientific thinking, essential expertise in their discipline, and problem-solving skills.

You can access standards and resources for this section here: Content and Activities

Section 5: Interaction. It includes standards for establishing clear expectations for instructor to student, student to student, and student-to instructor interactions. This section also provides standards for building a sense of class community and offering opportunities for student interaction and collaboration. To meet the standards, faculty can design dedicated discussion forums, ice-breaking activities, planned office hours, and group discussions or presentations.

You can access standards and resources for this section here: Interaction

Section 6: Assessment and Feedback. It includes standards for ensuring frequent and appropriate diverse types of assessments, including self-assessment, peer assessment, and authentic assessment; assessment criteria (rubrics, exemplary work); and effective feedback practices. To meet the standards, faculty can provide clear grading policies, an up-to-date gradebook, authentic assessment in terms of case studies or semester-long projects, and frequent and constructive feedback. To continuously improve course design, faculty can include a course evaluation survey so that students can provide feedback on their experience and suggestions for improvements.

You can access standards and resources for this section here: Assessment & Feedback

2.2.3 OSCQR Rubric 4.1: Adding COIL Standards

Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) brings instructors and students from differing cultures together “to learn, discuss, and collaborate as part of their class.” Instructors team up with one another to design the learning experience, and students work together to complete the assigned activities designed by their instructors. COIL is embedded into the class, offering the students to have a meaningful cross-cultural experience. The SUNY COIL Center provides a detailed explanation of COIL modules, how a module is developed, and a COIL self-check.

COIL standards includes four standards, respectively addressing four aspects of collaborative online international learning: intercultural communication, cultural awareness, collaboration, and teamwork skills.

1. Learners engage in scaffolded opportunities for communication among intercultural virtual team members.
2. Learners engage in activities that help them recognize their partner’s cultural values, beliefs, and biases, as well as their own.
3. Learners construct a culturally collaborative and respectful dialogue in an international virtual team, both verbally and non-verbally.
4. Learners in cross-cultural groups build skills to organize and distribute the work in asynchronous and synchronous technology platforms.

These four aspects are essential for students to master for the future workplace. Faculty can click on each standard on the COIL standards page to access  resources, including standard, explanations of each standard, and references.

2.2.4 Accessing OSCQR and COIL Resources

Faculty can access additional OSCQR and COIL resources below:

• 4.0 OSCQR Self-Assessment in English .pdf 
• 4.0 OSCQR Self-Assessment in Spanish
• New Version 4.1 of COIL + OSCQR standards in PDF in English
• New Version 4.1 of COIL + OSCQR standards in PDF in Spanish
• Generate your OSCQR SUNY Online Interactive Rubric – version 4.0

Generate your OSCQR SUNY Online Interactive Dashboard – version 4.0

2.3 The Course Review Scorecard

We suggest faculty should assess your online course design and delivery using the Scorecard that you can easily download. If you are one member of OLC, you can access to the Quality Scorecard Resource Portal. to access Course Review Scorecard Handbook, Assistant GPT, Transition Guide, and Peer Reviewer Guide, and more community quality resources, including playbooks, webinars, and articles.

2.3.1 Why the Course Review Scorecard?

FHSU has decided to adopt the latest Course Review Scorecard for the following three reasons:

Addressing both of course design and delivery. As we all know, how an instructor deliver an online course can create a good or bad learning experience even though the course is well designed (Barth, March 6, 2025). If an instructor did a bad job in facilitating online discussions, students would not be able to engage in meaningful conversations or learn a lot from each other. So, this course review scorecard can be used by instructors to self-assess their online course design and delivery. The scorecard can be also used to guide their teaching.

Open licensing. The scorecard is open licensed so that users can share it, use it freely, and customize to their needs without worrying about the copyright issue. The scorecard is remixable and can be adapted to fit indivudal or organizational needs; Don’t try to make money from it, please (Barth, March 6, 2025).

Having separate objectives focused on essential design and advanced design. The objectives focused on essential design are helpful for first-time instructors. These first-time instructors might be nervous about online teaching. We all know the less is more. The 20 objectives focused on essential design will help first-time instructors design their online course and review their online course after it’s offered. For experienced instructors, they can review their courses by referring to those 15 objectives focused on advanced design. This will help experienced instructors continuously improve their online courses.

Easy access. Faculty can easily download the Course Review Scorecard for free (Barth, March 6, 2025) when they need it.

2.3.1 What is Course Review Scorecard?

The scorecard includes

2.4 Introduction to RSI

The content in this section is based on resources provided by SUNY OSCQR and WCET (WICHE Cooperative for Educational Technologies), the leading organization in the practice, policy, & advocacy of digital learning in higher education.

2.3.1 What is RSI?

The U.S. Congress has differentiated distance education from correspondence education (which provides limited interactions between instructors and students), in order to determine institutional eligibility for federal financial aid. The key difference is an expectation of Regular and Substantive Interaction (RSI) in distance education. In 2021, the U.S. Department of Education provided a more thorough definition of distance education with specific RSI requirements. RSI-WCET provides a detailed explanation of these requirements. In an online course, “substantive” interaction should include at least two of the following:

1. “Providing direct instruction which should be live, synchronous instruction where both the instructor and students are online and in communication at the same time. So, asynchronous lecture videos are not considered as direct instructions (WCET, 11/8/2022);”
2. “Assessing or providing feedback on a student’s coursework;”
3. “Providing information or responding to questions about the content of a course or competency;”
4. “Facilitating a group discussion regarding the content of a course or competency; or”
5. “Other instructional activities approved by the institution’s or program’s accrediting agency.”

“Regular” interaction should include both:

• Substantive interactions with students should be predictable and scheduled, for instance, scheduled office hours;
• Instructors monitor student engagement and performance and must promptly and proactively engage in RSI when needed based on this monitoring, or upon student request.

2.3.2 Why Should We Implement RSI?

RSI could benefit faculty by providing five clear forms of interactions that faculty can implement in one online course. RSI benefits online students by ensuring that one course is learner-centered and includes regular and substantive interactions between faculty and students. These interactions would help students engage in online courses without feeling isolated.

Additionally, RSI supports alignment with evidence-based practices based on the neuroscience of learning. According to CAST (2018), the plasticity of the brain suggests that frequent and formative feedback on students’ performance can strengthen the connections within our learning brains.

2.3.3 Ensuring RSI

Regular and substantive interaction does not clearly define the types of activities that should be used to address its requirements. It is a lawful statement that can be loosely interpreted and can cause confusion when it comes to selecting appropriate activities and interactions. So, how can we incorporate RSI into course design?

2.3.4 Following OSCQR Standards to Ensure RSI

One effective way to implement RSI is to follow the 7 RSI standards in the OSCQR rubric. OSCQR standards 2, 3, 29, 38, 39, 41, and 43 are called regular and substantive interaction (RSI) standards, which directly address the RSI requirements.

The following seven standards are provided below. You can click each standard to see more explanations on the OSCQR website.

Seven RSI Standards

• Standard #2 – Course provides an overall orientation or overview, as well as module-level overviews to make course content, activities, assignments, due dates, interactions, and assessments, predictable and easy to navigate/find.
• Standard #3 –  Course includes a course information area and syllabus that make course expectations clear and findable.
• Standard #29 – Course offers access to a variety of engaging resources to present content, support learning and collaboration, and facilitate regular and substantive interaction with the instructor.
• Standard #38 – Regular and substantive instructor-to-student expectations, and predictable/scheduled interactions and feedback. are present, appropriate for the course length and structure, and are easy to find.
• Standard #39 – Expectations for all course interactions (instructor to student, student to student, student to instructor) are clearly stated and modeled in all course interaction/communication channels.
• Standard #41 – Course provides activities intended to build a sense of class community, support open communication, promote regular and substantive interaction, and establish trust (e.g., ice-breaking activities, Course Bulletin Board, planned Office Hours, and dedicated discussion forums).
• Standard #43 – Course provides learners with opportunities in course interactions to share resources and inject knowledge from diverse sources of information with guidance and/or standards from the instructor.

OSCQR Standards that Support RSI

OSCQR Standards 1, 6, 9, 10, 19, 30, 31, 40, 44-47, can be leveraged to support and articulate RSI.

2.3.5 Examples of RSI Compliance

Here are a few specific examples of how to account for what is considered RSI or not considered RSI with examples.

Note:  Remember, a course activity is not considered to be RSI if there is no interaction involved, or if interactions are not substantive or regular.

Additional Resources

• Regular and Substantive Interaction (RSI) Examples. The examples are obtained from the related OSCQR website.
• WCET (n.d). Regular and Substantive Interaction
• OSCQR-Informed Tools and Resources.
• OSCQR community resources for tips, suggestions, and support.
• COIL Resources

References

Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2018). UDL and the learning brain. CAST. http://www.cast.org/products-services/resources/2018/udl-learning-brain-neuroscience

Barth, D. (March 6, 2025). Introducing OLC’s Course Review Scorecard. https://onlinelearningconsortium.org/olc-insights/2025/03/new-course-review-scorecard/

WICHE Cooperative for Educational Technologies (WCET). (2023, February 28). Where’s the beef? Having fun teaching and ensuring regular and substantive interaction. WCET. https://wcet.wiche.edu/frontiers/2023/02/28/wheres-the-beef-having-fun-teaching-and-ensuring-rsi/

WICHE Cooperative for Educational Technologies. (WCET). (2022, November 8). Regular and substantive interaction update: Where do we go from here? WCET. https://wcet.wiche.edu/frontiers/2022/11/08/regular-substantive-interaction-update-where-do-we-go/