Multifaceted integration of e-learning with the practices in higher education - a case study of University of Houston-Downtown

Michał Kuciapski


The aim of this article is to evaluate the integration of different forms of e-learning that would support the realization of educational processes at the University of Gdańsk (UG). Research was performed as a case study at the University of Houston-Downtown (UHD) so as to transfer best practices to UG. Data come from direct observation and in-depth, structured interviews.
The data obtained indicated the conditions for the use of e-learning such as: forms, areas, technologies, methods of realization, gained benefits and challenges. Study indicated that implementation of e-learning at UG in the areas of blended learning, fully e-learning classes and external video-conferencing would be promising (there is little if any need for internal videoconferencing at UG). Fully e-learning programmes are not allowed by Polish educational law, so is extensive use of tutors (trained best students from previous years). Implementation of multifaceted e-learning at UG, similar to the one at UHD would require granting significant budget and, more importantly, establishing Centre for Teaching and Learning supporting development of technical and methodological skills of e-teaching faculty.


  • 1470 Rozporządzenie Ministra Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego z dnia 2 listopada 2011 r. Pobrane z:
  • Bates, T. (2005). Three generations of distance education. Technology, E-learning and Distance Education. Abingdon.
  • Bernhard, R.M., Abrami, P.C., Borokhovski, Y., Wade, A., Wozney, L., Wallet, P., Fiset, M., Huang, B. (2004). How Does Distance Education Compare With Classroom Instruction? A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature. Review of Educational Research, vol. 74, no 3.
  • Cho, S.K. (2007). Current status and future of MALL. Multimedia Assisted Language Learning, vol. 10, no 3.
  • Eisenbach, B. (2016). Considering the Virtual Classroom: A Call to Middle Level Education Programs. Middle Grades Review, vol. 2, iss. 1.
  • Geddes, S.J. (2004). Mobile learning in the 21st century: benefit for learners. Knowledge Tree e-journal, vol. 30, no. 3.
  • Guzzo, T., Grifoni, P., Ferri, F. (2012). Social Aspects and Web 2.0 Challenges in Blended Learning. P. Anastasiades (ed.). Blended Learning Environments for Adults: Evaluations and Frameworks. Hershey, PA: Information Science.
  • Hadidi, R., Power, D. (2017). Implications of the Sharing Economy for Online and Blended Education. Journal of the Midwest Association for Information Systems (JMWAIS), vol. 2017, iss. 1. DOI:
  • Hensman, A. (2010). Required Features of a Virtual Classroom Tool for Use in Higher Education. The ITB Journal, vol. 11, iss. 2.
  • Hill, T., Chidambaram, L., Summers, J. (2013). A Field Experiment in Blended Learning. Performance Effects of Supplementing the Traditional Classroom Experience with a Web-based Virtual Learning Environment. AMCIS 2013 Proceedings. Chicago.
  • Horton, W. (2006). E-Learning by Design. San Francisco.
  • Keengwe, J., Maxfield, M.B. (2015). Advancing Higher Education with Mobile Learning Technologies: Cases, Trends, and Inquiry-Based Methods. IGI Global.
  • Kuciapski, M. (2017). A model of mobile technologies acceptance for knowledge transfer by employees. Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 21, iss. 5.
  • Kuciapski, M. (2009). Elaboration and Implementation of management model for developing e-learning courses. Proceedings of BIR'2009 The Eighth International Conference on Perspectives in Business Informatics Reseach. Kristenstadt.
  • Levy, D., Schrire, S. (2015). Developing a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) at a College of Education: Narrative of Disruptive Innovation?. Current Issues in Emerging eLearning, vol. 2, iss. 1.
  • McCoy, E. (2017). Open Educational Resources: Expanding the Conversation Regarding Adoption and Use on a College Campus. The Christian Librarian, vol. 60, iss. 1.
  • Miller-First, M., Ballard, K. (2017). Constructivist Teaching Patterns and Student Interactions. Internet Learning, vol. 6, iss. 1.
  • Nikolopoulos, A., Holten, R. (2007). Analysis of E-Learning Implementation Cost Pools. ACIS Proceedings, Paper 25.
  • Prabjanee, D., Inthachot, M. (2013). Self-directed Learning Readiness of College Students in Thailand. Journal of Educational Research and Innovation, vol. 2, no 1.
  • Remtulla, K.A. (2010). Socio-Cultural Impacts of Workplace E-Learning: Epistemology, Ontology and Pedagogy. IGI Global.
  • Renner, D., Laumer, S., Weitzel, T. (2015). Blended Learning Success: Cultural and Learning Style Impacts. Wirtschaftsinformatik Proceedings, Paper 92.
  • Thorne, K. (2003). Blended learning: how to integrate online & traditional learning. London.
  • Wilson, D.P., Williams, P., Long, W.R., Northcote, M.T. (2017). Learning Thresholds: A Journey in Online Learning and Teaching. TEACH Journal of Christian Education, vol. 11, iss. 1, article 9.
  • Zamberlan, L., Wilson, S.E. (2017). Conversation Leading to Progress: Student Perceptions of Peer Tutors' Contribution to Enhancing Creativity and Collaboration in a First Year Design Studio. Journal of Peer Learning, vol. 10.
  • Zhang, W. (2013). Entering the 3rd Generation of e-Learning: Characteristics and Strategies. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange (JETDE), vol. 6, iss. 1.

Michał Kuciapski

About the article


The article is in the printed version on pages 74-85.

pdf download PDF

pdf read the article (Polish)

How to cite

Kuciapski, M. (2018). Wielopłaszczyznowa integracja e-nauczania dla prowadzenia dydaktyki akademickiej - studium przypadku uczelni University of Houston-Downtown. e-mentor, 1(73), 74-85. DOI: