In the advanced psycholinguistic and pedagogical evaluation of language proficiency, assessing the four macro-skills (Listening, Speaking, Reading, Writing) requires robust diagnostic frameworks and precise methodological instruments. Consider the following four propositions regarding the evaluation of language comprehension and production: I. In assessing advanced reading comprehension, employing integrative testing techniques such as the cloze procedure or C-test effectively measures a learner's underlying psycholinguistic redundancy, contextual guessing capabilities, and semantic expectancy grammar by deleting every nth word or the latter half of every second word. II. When evaluating productive speaking proficiency in high-stakes communicative examinations, holistic rating scales are theoretically and diagnostically superior to analytic rubrics because holistic scales independently isolate and quantify distinct sub-components such as grammatical accuracy, lexical resource, and phonological intelligibility. III. In second language listening pedagogy, assessing top-down listening comprehension requires tasks that prompt learners to activate broad schematic background knowledge, recognize discourse markers, and infer speaker intent, contrasting sharply with bottom-up processing tasks that focus on decoding phonetic segments, morphosyntactic structures, and individual lexical items. IV. In evaluating advanced academic writing, formative assessment frameworks that incorporate recursive drafting, peer review, and self-assessment significantly enhance a learner's metacognitive awareness of textual cohesion, rhetorical organization, and pragmatic appropriateness. Identify the option that correctly evaluates the pedagogical, psycholinguistic, and methodological validity of propositions I, II, III, and IV according to language testing principles and standard English language teaching methodology.