In this article, the analysis conducted by Tumolo and Tomich (2007) and Tumolo (2005) on items from the English subtest of the University of Campinas entrance examination has been questioned. The analysis, carried out as part of a study which investigates the defensibility of items from three different EFL assessment instruments -- international proficiency tests (TOEF and IELTS), entrance examinations of two Brazilian universities (Unicamp e UFSC) and classroom tests developed by the teacher -- has construct validity as its main criterion. The items were divided into defensible and non-defensible. According to the authors, defensible items are those which "allow for the demonstration of the reading ability as described in the construct, whereas non-defensible items do not allow for collecting evidence for a more valid interpretation of the relevant ability" (Tumolo and Tomich, 2007, p. 67). Our main criticism is that the reading construct used for the analysis is different from the one which underlies the Unicamp examination.713048