Comparing interteaching and discussion forums in an asynchronous online classroom

Shaw et al. (2024) ran an online graduate class using two setups. One week students used interteaching. The next week they used a discussion board.

They flipped the order for different students so everyone tried both ways. Then they compared quiz and assignment scores.

Quiz scores were higher after interteaching weeks. Assignment scores stayed the same no matter which setup was used.

In short, interteaching helped students remember facts for quizzes, but it did not change the quality of bigger projects.

Wong et al. (2009) also tested interteaching in class, but they added extra credit for good prep sheets. That tweak did nothing for exam scores. Shaw’s team shows the core method, not the extras, drives the gain.

Rehfeldt et al. (2010) used point contingencies to boost homework return in a grad class. Homework rose, yet quiz scores stayed flat, just like Shaw’s flat assignment scores. Together the studies warn: you can nudge one metric without moving the other.

Burney et al. (2025) found micro-breaks lifted engagement and focus. Shaw found interteaching lifted quiz scores. Both tell the same story: small, low-cost moves can improve learning outcomes without big course overhauls.

If you teach CEU or grad courses online, swap one discussion-board week for interteaching. Give students a short prep sheet, pair them in brief live chats, and follow with a few quiz questions. You may see higher quiz averages with no extra grading time. Keep the big projects as they are; the study shows they won’t suffer.