“互联网+”时代下“草根服务草根”模式发展两面观——在线教育领域中草根模式发展的问题分析

Two-sided Analysis of the Development of “Grassroots Service Grassroots” Model under the Era of Internet Plus: Analysis of the Development of the Model in the Field of Online Education

互联网催生商业领域的转型和变革,产生"草根服务草根"的创新服务模式,但草根模式在在线教育领域中久经尝试却失败。为了探寻其中的原因,本文首先通过文献、制度、政策梳理构建了"草根服务草根"模式分析框架,包括商业和教育两大要素,学习者规模、成本-效益、制度保障、政策土壤、教学成效等五大子要素。之后选取了商业领域和在线教育领域中典型的"草根服务草根"模式实践案例,利用分析框架对案例进行了分析和对比,总结出在线教育领域该模式发展的问题框架。研究发现,"草根服务草根"模式在教育领域中的发展和成熟存在诸多障碍和欠缺,集中为四个要素:用户对教育的消费习惯和意识不足够开放,迷信权威,用户的公信文化培育不良;支持模式发展壮大的可持续性的成本-效益模式不成熟;欠缺相关制度保障,缺少学分认证制度、质量保证制度、用户评价制度等,来激励草根参与服务并保证资源与服务的质量;缺失政策土壤,缺少维护网络知识产权的专门的法律法规,缺少政府对在线教育领域内实践的有效监管,也缺少推行创新教育模式积极实践的支持性政策。

The Internet has given birth to the transformation of commercial field, resulting in an innovative service model of ＂Grassroots Service Grassroots＂, but this model has failed in online education. In order to explore the reasons, this paper constructed the analytical framework of ＂Grassroots Service Grassroots＂ model through literature, system and policy, including the two major elements of business and education, and the five sub-elements of the size of learners, cost-benefit, institutional guarantee, policy soil and teaching effectiveness. Then This paper analyzed and compared the typical cases that chosen from the field of economic and online education with the analytical framework, and summed up the problem framework of the development of this model in the field of online education. It was found that there are many obstacles and difficulties in the development and maturation of the ＂Grassroots Service Grassroots＂ model in the field of education： the user’s consumption habits and awareness of education is not open enough, and the user’s credit culture nurture is poor; lacking of cost-benefit model to support the model for sustainable development; relevant system is not perfect, and lacking of mutual recognition of credits system, quality assurance system and user evaluation system to motivate people participation in service and ensure the quality of education; the policy, lacking of maintenance of network intellectual property laws and regulations, lacking of effective government supervision of practices in the field of education, and lacking of supportive policies to promote the active implementation of the innovative education model.