Assignment B Personal Characteristics Personal characteristic of a test taker is a personal attributes that are not includes part of test

takers languages ability but which has effect on the language performance. When we start to develop our test we are doubtful on how to get far of track. Majority of inappropriate test tasks results from trying to develop a test without a specific TLU domain or specific test takers mind. Due to this reason, the developer will need to develop a precise list of individual attribute that has to be considered in terms of their potential impact to the usefulness of the test. For example in any test development project the followings are considered as the individual attribute of a test taker. 1. Age: 18 and above, but mostly between 18 and 23 years. 2. Sex: Female and Male 3. Nationality :Widely varied 4. Immigrant status: Immigrants and International students 5. Native language: Widely varied 6. Level and type of general education: Postgraduates transfer students with a minimum of one year education in Northern part of Malaysia University. 7. Type and amount of preparation or previous experience with a given test. Majority of test takers will be familiar with ESL proficiency test. For example the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL), the Michigan Test of English Language Proficiency (University of Michigan ND) and the Cambridge Certificate of Proficiency in English (CPE). Topical Knowledge This is also referred to as real world knowledge. Topical knowledge can also be called as the knowledge structures in long term memory. Generally, personal topical knowledge needs to emphasis in an illustration of language use because of it is importance. Due to the fact that test it provides information that enables the user to use language with the references based on the environment in which they live. There are two broad forms of topical knowledge that test takers may bring to the test.
1

1. Homogeneous specific topical knowledge 2. Widely varied topical knowledge A homogeneous test taker can use that knowledge as the base with which he can demonstrate their ability. Test takers that familiars with the test have topical know ledge of the test and find it more easily compared to those that does not have topical knowledge. For example, If we want to develop a test for Economics students on merits and demerits of a liberal fiscal policy. Language user might expect Economics student to bring relevant experience and suitable description of their topical knowledge compared with those that does not possess the relevant specific knowledge. Affective Schemata Affective schemata can be described as the emotional relations of topical knowledge. The affective schemata provides the means by which languages users assess the attributes of the languages use and the theme based on the previous knowledge psychology experience in the same areas. The affective schemata of the language users it determine the degree of which language users response to an assignment. The affective responses of languages user it has effect on how the flexibility of adapt language use indifferent environment as well as on how to use language in a specific settings. In a language test, the affective schemata might have effect on the test takers attempting to finish the tasks. Affective schemata can reduce the psychological thinking of the test takers to use the full range of language knowledge in dealing with emotional change topic. Psychological responses also have effect on language use. For example, test takers that have positive interacting with another are likely to perform brilliantly in face to face or oral interview. Correspondingly, emotional responses can also assist language user. For example, individual who is well equipped about one topic might performance excellently on the topic. In conclusion, language user should design test in a way that can yield excellence performance for the test takers. This can be achieved by design test characteristics in a manner that will bring relief to the test takers. However, there must be justification between what the language user want to assess and how the test is appropriates to the test takers. By putting it into consideration, it will enable the test taker feels comfortable and ease.
2

Language Knowledge Language knowledge is use by metacognitive strategies in creating and interpretation discourse in language use. There are two foams of language knowledge 1. Organizational knowledge 2. Pragmatics knowledge. Organizational knowledge Organizational knowledge: is how utterance or sentences and texts are organized. The presentation of knowledge refers to the production and conversation of meaning through language. Again, the connection between concepts and language enable us to either the real world or imaginary world. Pragmatics knowledge: Is how utterance or sentences and text are related to the communicative goals of the language user and to the features of the language use setting. According to Daley et, al (2013), there are three text formats: Written Discourse Completion Test (WDCT) Multiple Choice Discourse Complexion Test (MDCT), and Discourse SelfAssessment Test (DSAT). To measure language user inter language pragmatic knowledge in EFL context the reliability studies revealed that WDCT and DSAT were highly reliable and MDCT was also reasonable reliable. Analyses of verbal reports yielded results which supported construct relevant knowledge was involved in the test takers cognitive activities. Cognitive process involved the strategies that participants adopted in answering questions with different methods appeared to differ. In conclusion, languages test design must have focus on a wider view of language ability. Language user should understand how to develop component of language ability. Also, they should be aware about the development of language test and how to interpret the languages scores. Reference Daley, L. A. A., Wagner, J. K., Himmel, T. L., McPartland, K. A., Katsanis, S. H., Shriver, M. D., & Royal, C. D. (2013). Personal DNA Testing in College Classrooms:

Perspectives of Students and Professors. Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers, 17(6), 446-452.