From Validity to Equity: Revisiting CET-4 Through Messick, Kane, and Paraskeva’s Frameworks

The College English Test Band 4 (CET-4) is a high-stakes, standardised English proficiency assessment widely administered in Chinese universities. Initially developed to evaluate non-English majors’ language competence, it has since evolved into a gatekeeping mechanism that influences graduation eligibility, access to scholarships, postgraduate admissions, and employment opportunities. As English education becomes increasingly globalised, concerns have emerged about the test's ability to fairly and validly assess diverse learners across China. In particular, the CET-4 has been criticised for its narrow focus on decontextualised tasks, its reliance on Western-centred content, and its failure to accommodate the sociolinguistic realities of rural, minority, and low-income students. This study critically reassesses the CET-4 through the lens of three theoretical frameworks: Messick's theory of validity, Kane's principles of fairness, and Paraskeva's epistemic pluralism. Drawing on these perspectives, it examines the test's alignment with international benchmarks, such as the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). It identifies key limitations in construct validity, cultural inclusivity, and equitable access. The analysis reveals that the CET-4 often produces construct-irrelevant variance, reinforces systemic educational inequalities, and reduces English learning to test-oriented preparation. The study proposes a multidimensional reform agenda that includes modular testing tailored to regional contexts, performance-based assessments that reflect real-world communication, and integrating culturally responsive content. It also recommends stakeholder engagement through participatory test design, implementing fairness audits, and adopting equity-based funding models such as Weighted Student Funding (WSF) to address systemic disparities. These reforms seek to uphold psychometric rigour and ethical responsibility, ensuring that large-scale assessments like the CET-4 better reflect the realities and needs of diverse test-takers. Ultimately, the paper argues that the CET-4 must transition from a rigid gatekeeping instrument to a more inclusive and context-sensitive evaluation platform that aligns with international standards while promoting educational equity and opportunity in the Chinese context.