In the advanced assessment of second language comprehension and language proficiency, evaluating the four macro-skills (Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing) requires distinguishing between discrete-point testing and integrative assessment, as well as understanding construct validity. Consider the following four advanced propositions regarding the evaluation of language proficiency: I. In assessing reading comprehension proficiency, cloze tests and C-tests—where every $n$-th word or half of every word is systematically deleted—function as integrative tasks that measure a learner's semantic expectancy, redundancy utilization, and macro-linguistic processing rather than isolated decoding skills. II. In evaluating speaking proficiency, direct oral proficiency interviews (OPI) assess pragmatic competence, discourse management, and sociolinguistic appropriateness, whereas indirect or semi-direct speaking tasks (such as computer-recorded prompts) completely eliminate anxiety-induced construct-irrelevant variance. III. In writing assessment, holistic scoring methods provide a single aggregate score based on an overall impression of the text's quality, making them highly efficient for large-scale standardized testing, whereas analytic scoring provides detailed diagnostic feedback across specific rubric dimensions (such as organization, vocabulary, and mechanics). IV. In listening comprehension evaluation, assessing top-down processing involves testing a listener's ability to extract specific micro-details, phonetic distinctions, and exact lexical items without relying on contextual background schemata or global discourse expectations. Identify the option that correctly evaluates the methodological, psycholinguistic, and psychometric validity of propositions I, II, III, and IV according to language testing principles and Language assessment standards.