The proposal-writing (对策) question

The 对策题 in the Guokao Shenlun architecture

The proposal question (提出对策题, often shortened to 对策题) is one of the five standard Shenlun question types defined by China's State Administration of Civil Service (国家公务员局) in its annual examination syllabus (考试大纲). It instructs the candidate to read the given material (给定资料), identify a stated or implied problem, and propose concrete, feasible measures (对策) to resolve it. A characteristic stem reads: 「根据给定资料X，针对……问题，提出你的解决建议。要求：建议合理可行、有针对性、条理清楚，不超过300字。」

The question rewards three competencies the syllabus names explicitly: 提出和解决问题能力 (the capacity to identify and solve problems) and, in the prefecture/municipal track (地市级), 贯彻执行能力 (executive implementation). Unlike the comprehensive essay (文章论述题, Lesson 11), the 对策题 is scored almost entirely on substance and structure, not eloquence. Answers run 200–400 characters; word ceilings are strictly enforced and overruns are penalized.

Two sub-types you must distinguish

First, the pure proposal question: the problem is named for you, and you supply measures. Second, the 概括问题+提出对策 hybrid: you must first summarize the problem in one or two sentences, then propose solutions. Reading the 要求 (requirements) line is decisive—if it says 「先概括问题，再提出对策」, omitting the summary forfeits points. The 2019 副省级 (sub-provincial) paper and numerous provincial 联考 papers since 2015 have used this hybrid form.

The cardinal rule: measures come from the material

The single most common failure is fabricating generic measures from personal opinion. Shenlun proposals must be 来源于材料 (derived from the given material). Examiners build the answer key from solution-cues embedded in the text: successful pilot programs, expert recommendations, policy documents quoted, and—critically—the inverse of problems described. If the material states 「某地农产品因缺乏冷链物流而大量腐烂」, the extractable measure is 「建设冷链物流体系」. This inversion technique (问题反推法) generates roughly half of all scoring points.

The other extraction sources are: direct policy statements in the material (e.g., a quoted 《乡村振兴促进法》provision); model cases (典型经验) that can be generalized into transferable measures; and the speech of officials or experts quoted in interviews. Train yourself to annotate the material with a 「策」 mark wherever a latent solution appears, exactly as you mark 「问」 for problems in the summary question (Lesson 7).

Why this matters for the exam

The 对策题 appears on virtually every Guokao Shenlun paper—central administrative organ track (中央机关综合管理类) and prefecture track alike—and typically carries 15–20 of the 100 marks. More importantly, it is the gateway skill: the comprehensive essay's body paragraphs reuse the same measure-generation logic, so candidates who master extraction here gain points twice. The 国家公务员局 syllabus pairs this question with 贯彻执行能力, signalling that examiners want measures phrased as an official would draft them, not as a commentator would opine.

The PYQ pattern is stable. Since the 2012 reform that split the paper into 副省级 and 地市级 versions, the prefecture track has favored implementation-heavy proposals (concrete steps, responsible bodies), while the sub-provincial track favors more analytical, systemic proposals. Know which paper you sit: a 地市级 candidate who writes abstract 'strengthen top-level design' (加强顶层设计) platitudes without operational detail loses 针对性 (relevance) marks.

The standard answer skeleton

A high-scoring proposal follows a fixed administrative architecture:

1. 总起句 (lead sentence) — one clause naming the goal: 「为解决……问题，应从以下方面着手：」
2. 分条对策 (itemized measures) — each item begins with an action verb and a governance lever, then a brief explanation. The five canonical levers civil servants invoke are: 制度/法规 (institutions and law), 监管 (oversight and enforcement), 宣传/教育 (public communication), 资金/技术投入 (resource input), and 队伍/人才 (personnel and capacity). Map each problem to the matching lever.
3. 主体+手段+目的 formula — every measure should answer: who acts (主体), by what means (手段), to what end (目的). Example: 「市场监管部门（主体）应建立黑名单制度并加大抽检力度（手段），以杜绝假冒伪劣（目的）。」

Drafting register and common deductions

Write in the impersonal, declarative official voice: use 应、需、要、应当 and modal verbs of obligation; avoid first-person and rhetorical questions. Each measure should be self-contained and parallel in grammar (排比/对仗 structure aids the 条理清楚 score). Deductions cluster around four faults: (1) measures not 针对 the named problem; (2) duplication—two items that are the same lever reworded; (3) vagueness without an implementing body; and (4) exceeding the character cap. Allocate roughly 80% of characters to the measures and keep the lead and any problem-summary terse.