Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 66Online and Blended LearningOnline Learning and AnalyticsStudent Assessment and Feedback

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

EXPLORING THE INTERACTION EQUATION: VALIDATING A RUBRIC TO ASSESS AND ENCOURAGE INTERACTION IN DISTANCE COURSES

Open access
Roblyer, Margaret D., Wiencke, William R.·2004·Online Learning
DOI 10.24059/olj.v8i4.1808
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The degree of interaction among participants in distance courses is widely acknowledged to be an indicator of successful learning experiences; interaction has been found to contribute to both achievement and student satisfaction. As an increasing number of distance courses move to a completely asynchronous, online format, providing for better interaction is an important means of assuring course quality. To allow measurement and study of interaction in online courses, five elements were identified that contribute to interaction, and a rubric was designed to assess the degree of each in distance courses [1]. A previous use of the rubric in one online class [1] indicated the instrument had good convergent and divergent validity and reliability in terms of consistency of results across students. The current study focused on establishing the rubric’s concurrent validity and consistency of results across four distance courses. Recommendations are made to increase the usefulness and reliability of the rubric in practice.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.24059/olj.v8i4.1808

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 29

  1. Roblyer, M. D., & Wiencke, W. R. Design and Use of a Rubric to Assess and Encourage Interactive Qualities In Distance Courses. The American Journal of Distance Education 17(2): 77-97, 2003.
  2. Gilbert, L., & Moore, D. R. Building Interactivity Into Web Courses: Tools For Social And Instructional Interaction. Educational Technology 38(3): 29-35, 1998.
  3. Moore, M. Three Types Of Interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education 3(2): 1989. Available online: http://www.ed.psu.edu/acsde/ajde/ed32.asp.
  4. Vrasidas, C., and McIsaac, M. S. Factors Influencing Interaction In An Online Course. The American Journal of Distance Education 13(3): 22-36, 1999.
  5. Wagner, E. D. In Support Of A Functional Definition Of Interaction. American Journal of Distance Education 8(2): 6-29, 1994.
  6. Yacci, M. Interactivity Demystified: A Structural Definition For Distance Education And Intelligent Computer-Based Instruction. Educational Technology 40(4): 5-16, 2000.
  7. Fulford, C. P., and Zhang, S. Perceptions Of Interaction: The Critical Predictor In Distance Education. American Journal of Distance Education 7(3): 8-21, 1993.
  8. Zhang, S. and Fulford, C. P. Are Interaction Time And Psychological Interactivity The Same Thing In The Distance Learning Television Classroom? Educational Technology 34(6): 58-64, 1994.
  9. Zirkin, B. G., and Sumler, D. E. Interactive Or Non-Interactive? That Is The Question!!! An annotated bibliography. Journal of Distance Education 10(1): 95-112, 1995.
  10. Swan, K. Virtual Interaction: Design Factors Affecting Student Satisfaction and Perceived Learning in Asynchronous Online Courses. Distance Education 22(2): 306-331, 2001.
  11. Jonassen, D., Peck, K., and Wilson, B. Learning With Technology: A Constructivist Perspective. Columbus, Ohio: Prentice Hall/Merrill, 1999.
  12. Goldsby, D., and Fazal, M. Now That Your Students Have Created Web-based Digital Portfolios, How do You Evaluate Them? Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 9(4): 607-616, 2001.
  13. Chenau, J. Cyber Traveling Through the Loire Valley. Learning and Leading with Technology, 28(2): 22-27, 2000.
  14. Picciano, A. Distance Learning: Making Connections Across Virtual Time and Space. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill, Prentice Hall, 2001.
  15. Wolcott, L. Distant, But Not Distanced. A Learner-Centered Approach To Distance Education. Techtrends 41(4): 23-27, 1996.
  16. Hamza, M. K., and Alhalabi, B. Touching Students' Minds In Cyberspace. Learning and Technology 26(6): 36-39, 1999.
  17. Hirumi, A., and Bermudez, A. Interactivity, Distance Education, And Instructional Systems Design Converge On The Information Superhighway. Journal of Research on Computing in Education 29(1): 1-16, 1996.
  18. Hughes, C., and Hewson, L. Online Interaction: Developing A Neglected Aspect Of The Virtual Classroom. Educational Technology 38(4): 48-55, 1998.
  19. Kimeldorf, M. Teaching Online-Techniques And Methods. Learning and Leading With Technology 23(1): 26-30, 1995.
  20. Klemm, W. Eight Ways To Get Students More Engaged In Online Conferences. T.H.E. Journal 26(1): 62-64, 1998.
  21. Simonson, M., Smaldino, S. Albright, M., and Zvacek, S. Teaching And Learning At A Distance: Foundations Of Distance Education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill, Prentice Hall, 2000.
  22. Horn, D. Distance Education: Is Interactivity Compromised? Performance and Instruction 33(9): 12- 15, 1994.
  23. Solloway, S., and Harris, E. Creating Community Online. Educom Review 34(2): 1999. Available online: http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/html/erm99021.html.
  24. Hillman, D. C. A., Willis, E. J, and Gunawardena, C. Learner-Interface Interaction In Distance Education: An Extension Of Contemporary Models And Strategies For Practitioners. American Journal of Distance Education 8(2): 30-42, 1994.
  25. Brown, R. The Process Of Community-Building In Distance Learning Classes. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 5(2): September 2001. Available online: http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/v5n2/v5n2_brown.asp.
  26. Roblyer, M. A Rubric To Encourage And Assess Student Engagement In Online Course Conferences. Paper presented at the Society for Information Technology in Teacher Education (SITE) Annual Conference, Nashville, Tennessee, March 2002.
  27. Taggart, G., Phifer, S., Nixon, J., and Wood, M. Rubrics: A Handbook For Construction And Use. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2001.
  28. Baker, E. L., and Abedi, J. Dimensionality and Generalizability of Domain-independent Performance Assessments. Journal of Educational Research 89(4): 197-205, March-April 1996.
  29. Novak, J. R., Herman, J. L., and Gearhart, M. L. Establishing Validity for Performance-based Assessments: An Illustration for Collections of Student Writing. Journal of Educational Research 89(4): 220-233, March-April 1996.

Cited by

See all 66

Metadata

Authors
Roblyer, M. D., & Wiencke, W. R.
Affiliations
University of West Georgia (US)
Venue
Online Learning
Publisher
The Online Learning Consortium
Published
2004-12-01
Volume
8
Issue
4
ISSN
  • 1092-8235 (ISSN-L)
  • 2472-5730
  • 2472-5749
DOI
10.24059/olj.v8i4.1808
OpenAlex
W2923038898
Cited by
66
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
3.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Online Learning (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
Keywords
interaction equations, online interaction, distance education, asynchronous online courses, rubric validation, concurrent validity, course quality, student satisfaction, interaction assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: EXPLORING THE INTERACTION EQUATION: VALIDATING A RUBRIC TO ASSESS AND ENCOURAGE INTERACTION IN DISTANCE COURSES. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.24059/olj.v8i4.1808
The paper
Roblyer, M. D., & Wiencke, W. R. (2004). EXPLORING THE INTERACTION EQUATION: VALIDATING A RUBRIC TO ASSESS AND ENCOURAGE INTERACTION IN DISTANCE COURSES. Online Learning. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v8i4.1808

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.