First, ideally, policy suggestions are written based on empirical results, but the targeted policy suggestions put forward by my brother are too dry for me to write three or five sentences.
Secondly, after consulting other graduation papers, I found that some big cows can bypass the empirical results and write tens of thousands of words of policy suggestions. To say that these policy suggestions have nothing to do with the empirical results, they actually have something to do, but they really have little to do with it.
Generally speaking, they are second best, and the reference topics are related to their own articles. Even if their policy suggestions have nothing to do with the empirical results of your paper, you can force them together in a few words. The difficulty lies in how to circle. It is too difficult to make policy suggestions out of thin air on one's own.
"Policy suggestion" is the direct application and logical extension of the conclusion of this paper.
"Policy suggestions" are based on the theoretical research and empirical research conclusions of dissertations, and put forward countermeasures to solve real social problems. This kind of countermeasure is a natural and direct extension of the research conclusion of the paper, and it is the result inferred when the theoretical research conclusion is applied to specific problems, which is in the same strain as the theoretical research conclusion of the paper in logic. Policy suggestions must be put forward according to the theoretical research and empirical research conclusions of the paper.
Some graduate students have thought about policy suggestions before conducting systematic theoretical research and empirical research, and put forward several or even nearly 20 policy suggestions in the thesis opening report. We haven't studied this problem yet, how can we make suggestions to solve it? This obviously violates the logic of academic research. There are also some tutors who already have their own policy ideas in their minds, hoping that their graduate students will make papers to demonstrate. No matter whether this proposition is reasonable or not, students have preconceived that this policy proposal is correct, and then they will do the research work of the thesis, which actually distorts academic research.
We often find that there are problems in the logical reasoning of policy suggestions for dissertations. Many graduate students look for policy suggestions without their own research results and theoretical research, so the whole dissertation can't keep logical consistency. Give a common example. In economic research, the general assumption is that "man is rational", and almost all social science research with the help of economic analysis methods takes this assumption as the basic premise. The "rational man hypothesis" holds that human rationality is equal and unchangeable. In this kind of research, the investigation of people's inner world is omitted, and factors such as emotion and morality are not investigated. Based on the research of "rational man hypothesis", people's "preference" is considered to be stable, and people's behavior is considered to be the result of rational choice. The difference and change of human behavior are caused by the difference and change of external constraints. The range of policy suggestions that this kind of research can put forward is limited to changing the constraints of system, material and technology, and cannot put forward suggestions to change people's subjective understanding, ideological understanding and moral level. However, some graduate students use economic analysis methods to conduct research, but they put forward countermeasures such as "changing people's ideas" and "improving their ideological understanding". Perhaps some suggestions may be correct and feasible, but logically speaking, this suggestion cannot be deduced from the research conclusion of the paper, so it should not appear in the paper.
Dissertation must be based on the laws found in the research and the causal relationship established in the paper, and find the methods and countermeasures to solve practical problems. However, not all social science studies can draw the conclusion of causality, and all studies have really confirmed the existence of laws. Social science research includes exploratory research, descriptive research and explanatory methods; Both quantitative and qualitative methods can be used. Quantitative research includes causality research and correlation research, and the corresponding conclusions are causality and correlation respectively. The study of correlation can't confirm the existence of causality. Exploratory research is only a preliminary exploration of the laws behind social phenomena, and it has not reached an accurate understanding of the laws. Case analysis can not be used as a means of causality test, and a positive causality conclusion can not be drawn only by case analysis. Therefore, using different research methods and techniques, the types of conclusions are different, and the types and affirmations of corresponding policy suggestions are also different. This point should be accurately distinguished and explained in the paper. For example, according to the conclusion of exploratory research, only "possible" solutions are proposed. These methods may also be inappropriate. What needs to be explained in detail is that the paper only gives "possible" and "potential" countermeasures to solve the problem.