Valid and Fair ESL Writing Assessment: A Framework Separating Rhetorical Style from Language Skill

This study identifies systematic "literacy variation gaps" in English as a Second Language (ESL) assessment frameworks that privilege Western rhetorical traditions while penalizing legitimate alternatives. Analysis of scoring criteria from major frameworks (TOEFL iBT, IELTS, classroom assessments) across five dimensions revealed construct-irrelevant variance stemming from rhetorical bias. Empirical evidence from prior research highlights the problem's significance. To address this, the paper introduces the Critical Extension Framework (CEF), a theoretical model designed for systematic operationalization and developed through the process of 'critical extension.' This process guides the re-theorization of assessment constructs to distinguish rhetorical differences from language proficiency limitations. This reconceptualization positions literacy variation as epistemological diversity rather than deficiency, advancing assessment theory toward improved construct representation across diverse rhetorical traditions.