Regular and Substantive Requirements in Distance Education

Effective Date: July 1, 2021

For courses and programs offered via distance education in which students may be eligible to use Title IV funds (federal financial aid), the Department of Education (ED) requires that institutions like the University of Colorado Boulder are able to confirm and document that there is regular and substantive interaction between students and their instructors.

This page aims to help faculty and staff understand this requirement and associated regulations, apprise them of the difference between distance and correspondence education, and offer guidance and suggestions for creating and offering opportunities for regular and substantive interaction in the digital classroom.

Distance Education

Distance education is, according to the ED, education that uses one or more technologies to deliver instruction to students who are physically separated from the instructor and to support regular and substantive interaction between the students and the instructor, either synchronously or asynchronously.

Not all education that takes place in a digital environment (e.g., online) is considered distance education—the level of interaction and who initiates the interaction matter greatly. An important distinction is, according to the ED, that a course or program that can be described as “self-paced” is considered to be correspondence education, regardless of the technology used.

For the university and our students, it is important to know the difference between “distance” and “correspondence” modalities when creating or delivering courses and programs. The core feature that distinguishes a distance course from a correspondence course is the presence of regular and substantive interaction.

While CU Boulder is recognized by our accreditor as an institution that offers/delivers correspondence courses and programs, those courses and programs are not Title IV aid eligible. If the university is found to have given aid to students for what is actually a correspondence course, sanctions could be imposed by the ED including fines and the requirement to repay the misused federal financial aid.

Regular and Substantive Interactions Defined

Regular Interactions Substantive Interactions
Regular Interactions

We are able to ensure regular interaction between a student and an instructor, prior to the student’s completion of a course or competency, by:

  1. Providing the opportunity for substantive interactions with the student on a predictable and scheduled basis commensurate with the length of time and the amount of content in the course or competency; and
  2. Monitoring the student’s academic engagement and success and ensuring that an instructor is responsible for promptly and proactively engaging in substantive interaction with the student when needed on the basis of such monitoring, or upon request by the student.

The requirement for the “regularity” of the interactions stops short of being overly prescriptive and allows for the various pedagogical techniques employed by the instructor(s) or required by the course. For this reason, course syllabi should clearly delineate expectations, instructional activities, regular meeting patterns, or opportunities for meetings per university guidelines.

Substantive interactions are interactions where the instructor actively engages students in teaching, learning, and assessment, consistent with the content under discussionĚýand must include at least two of the following:

  1. Providing direct instruction.
  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.
  5. Other instructional activities approved by the institution’s accrediting agency.

The language used by the Department of Education to clarify substantive interactions addresses the expectation that those involved in delivering distance education have the flexibility to be innovative in their approaches in education. That is, what is considered “substantive” for one course or program may not be for another.

Strategies for Implementation

Strategies and ideas for incorporating regular and substantive interaction requirements in your digital classroom are described below.

To meet regular and substantive interaction requirements, interactions must be:

  • Initiated by the instructor
  • Frequent and consistent
  • Focused on the course

When designing your course and/or writing your syllabus, please keep the following in mind to ensure incorporation of regular and substantive interactions in your digital classroom:

  • Design your course to include strategic points of, and regular opportunities for, interaction with the student.
  • Ensure that the pace of the course, including deadlines, is directed by the instructor and set through use of learning activities, online discussion, and lectures. That is, are assignments and assessment deadlines spread throughout the term of the class, instead of at students’ discretion?
  • Regardless of the method (synchronous or asynchronous), have a course schedule that includes written assignment due dates, exam dates, readings, and other assignments as relevant. Ensure that there are predictable opportunities for feedback throughout the semester.
  • Develop a communication plan to help guide and manage your interactions. For example, how often will you post conversation starters for and communicate with students in the learning management system?
  • Have you set clear expectations for interactions? Let students know what is expected from them and what they can expect from you as the instructor.
  • Regular and substantive interaction must occur between students and the instructor of record. This may be supplemented, but not replaced, by interactions between students and other teaching personnel who are supporting the course (e.g. teaching assistants, learning assistants, course facilitators, graders).
  • Are there multiple components in the course (e.g. lecture and a lab, experiential learning outside of the “classroom”)? How can these provide an opportunity to articulate various ways that interaction happens between you and the student.
  • Is the course on a predictable schedule? What piece(s) meet and how often?
  • What other kinds of opportunities for engagement are happening in the course (assessment, tutoring, answering questions)?
  • Student-to-student learning is important, but how do you facilitate or guide these conversations and associated learning?
  • How will you monitor the academic engagement of the students? How will you intervene when students are not succeeding in the course?
  • Are there tools you could use (e.g. the learning management system) that can aid the learning environment and make assessment, documentation, and interactions easy?

Examples of Interactions

Examples of regular and substantive interactions include, but are not limited to the following:

  • Regularly scheduled learning sessions where there is an opportunity for direct interaction between the student and the instructor.
  • Regular, timely, personalized, and constructive feedback on assignments, discussions, etc., that guides students to further knowledge and/or skills, identifying what has been done correctly or what may need improvement.
  • An instructor-moderated or facilitated online discussion, including follow-up questions and additional information.
  • Instructor posts announcements, email, or other check-ins about academic aspects of the class.
  • Regularly set office hours initiated by the instructor.
  • An overview video, provided by the instructor, to accompany lectures.
  • Additional interaction opportunities for students whom the instructor has identified (through observation of discussion activity, assessment completion, or user activity) as possibly struggling to reach mastery of the course. Use of small working or study groups that are moderated by the instructor.
  • Instructor announcements at strategic points in the course concerning courseĚýassignments and offering additional guidance.
  • Course materials that facilitate interactions between student(s) and instructor and require the student to contact the instructor or participate in an online discussion moderated by the instructor.
  • Online meetings and chats focusing on course material and/or addressing student questions.

What does not constitute interactions?

  • Assignment of pre-recorded lectures, webinars, videos, and reading materials if the course design does not require the students to review the assigned material and then interact directly with the instructor.
  • Only student-solicited office hours offered.
  • A student logging into a live webinar with no opportunity for interaction.
  • Courses without at least two of the methods listed (above) for substantive interaction.
  • Contact with instructors not related to the course subject matter.
  • Adding numeric grades to the course gradebook.
  • A student submits a quiz that is automatically graded.
  • Sending a welcome message during the first week of class and another around mid-semester.
  • Encouraging students to participate in an optional, one-time online review session before the final exam.
  • Reminding students of the course attendance policy.
  • Posting an announcement about an upcoming assignment deadline.
  • Providing an open-ended online forum that is not moderated by the instructor.

Frequently asked questions:

Instructors are not required to take attendance in courses offered via distance education. (SeeĚý,Ěýp. 54757)

The ED, in fact, acknowledges that this is not a federal requirement of courses offered in the physical classroom, either. The university and instructors are instead required to make the opportunity for interactions available: “It is the job of the institution to provide said opportunity and it’s the job of the student to take it.”Ěý(SeeĚý,Ěýpp. 54760-61)

There is no intention by the ED to have instructors monitor all student engagement through every aspect of a course. Instead, the ED expects that the university and programs have a sufficient system (including appropriate academic policies and procedures) for monitoring or periodically evaluating the online programs to ensure that instructors continue to monitor “whether a student is engaged and successful throughout a given course competency and takes appropriate action as needed.”Ěý(SeeĚý,Ěýp.54757.)

This allows an instructor and the university to comply with requirements without having to document every interaction.

Monitoring under ED regulations could include:

  • Reviewing and evaluating student participation in synchronous class sessions.
  • Monitoring the student’s activity on course discussion boards, chats, or materials.
  • Considering the quality of assignments or responses from students about course materials.
  • Evaluating the level of the student’s engagement and/or understanding of the course content and materials during interactions with instructors or performance on exams.

The ED does not expect an instructor or the university to document the exact amount of time the instructor or students spend on any one particular type of substantive interaction. As with traditional face-to-face courses, while an instructor has a general idea of how long a student should take to complete a reading or an assignment, it is not something that is tracked. However, as a university, we are expected to maintain academic policies and procedures that create expectations for instructors regarding substantive interactions with students and the subsequent monitoring and follow-up. These policies and procedures already exist at theĚýuniversity in the form of credit hour definitions, policies on course outcomes, and procedures relating to instructional design.

Ensuring regular and substantive interaction is entirely consistent with the university’s mission and values as an educational institution and is a hallmark of effective teaching. What’s important to remember is that innovation in instructional activities is great and encouraged, but instructors and the university will be required to demonstrate what these effective alternative methods are, how student academic progress is monitored, and how these activities are being assessed.

Some of the above examples are (or should be) similar to how we would interact with students in the physical classroom. The challenge is looking at this from the digital classroom perspective. Or phrased differently, how can we use our technology to help support interactions for academic engagement on a predictable and substantive basis?

How evidence of compliance is compiled will be unique to each course, program, and university. Looking at the examples above and keeping the available tools and technology in mind, instructors will want to assess the interaction methods used and what types of documentation they produce.

In general, to determine an institution’s compliance with requirements, the ED would evaluate whether the institution has “create[d] expectations for instructors to monitor each student’s engagement and substantively engage with students on the basis of that monitoring.”Ěý(SeeĚý,Ěýp. 54760)

This can be accomplished through communicating expectations (for example, through this FAQ, instructional design support, etc.) and regular collection and review of syllabi to ensure that the university and our instructors comply with the ED general requirements for monitoring and outreach.

Reviews of a university’s and/or program’s compliance with these definitions and requirements should take place during scheduled internal program reviews. While the ED has the authority to review the university’s offerings at any time, typically the ED will review compliance during its periodic Title IV review of the university. The university’s accreditor, the Higher Learning Commission, will review compliance during the reaccreditation process. Programs holding separate accreditation may also have to prove compliance at those reviews as well.

Should the university fail to document or comply with these regulations, there is a risk of having courses/programs reclassified as correspondence. If the university is audited by the ED’s Office of Inspector General or as part of a periodic financial aid (Title IV) program review and found to be out of compliance, the university may be required to repay financial aid associated with the correspondence courses and students.

Additionally, federal regulations () state that institutions that offer more than 50% of their students enrolled in correspondence courses (or offer more than 50% of their academic programs via correspondence education) risk losing all access to student financial aid.

As noted earlier in this guide, for the university and our students, it is important to know the difference between “distance” and “correspondence” modalities when creating or delivering courses and programs. Making sure that students understand the expectation of the course— not just in deliverables and exams, but also what they can expect from you, their instructor, when it comes to frequent and predictable interactions—is a vital part of ensuring student success. And while there could be many factors that contribute to a student having a quality “online” learning experience, when it comes to distance education those quality learning experiences are best measured and monitored through regular and substantive interactions.