CTFL_Syll_4.0 Sample Questions Answers

Error guessing is a testing technique where experienced testers anticipate potential defects based on their knowledge of the application and past experiences. Fault attacks, which involve focusing on areas where defects are likely to occur based on previous failures, are a practical implementation of error guessing.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 4.4.1 on error guessing and fault attacks, explaining how testers use their experience to anticipate and target likely defects​​.

A static analysis tool is best suited for determining source code compliance with the guidelines provided by a coding standard. Static analysis tools analyze code without executing it, checking for adherence to coding standards, potential errors, and code quality issues. They are designed to detect deviations from predefined coding standards and ensure that the code conforms to best practices and guidelines.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 3.2.3 on Static Analysis and its applications

The syllabus explains that static analysis tools are used to enforce coding standards and improve code quality by detecting issues early in the development process​​.

CTFL NEW

One of the typical potential risks associated with using test automation tools is the underestimation of the effort required to maintain test scripts. While test automation can reduce test execution times and provide more consistent and repeatable tests compared to manual testing, maintaining test scripts can be labor-intensive and often requires significant effort. Changes in the application under test can lead to frequent updates in the test scripts to keep them functional and relevant.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 6.2 on the benefits and risks of test automation tools

The syllabus outlines that while automation can improve efficiency, it also introduces maintenance challenges​​.

A pilot project is a small-scale experiment or trial that is conducted to evaluate the feasibility, effectiveness, and suitability of a test automation tool before implementing it on a larger scale1.

The objectives of a pilot project may vary depending on the context and scope of the test automation initiative, but some common ones are2:

To get familiar with the functionality and options of the tool

To check how the tool fits to the existing test processes and environment

To assess the benefits and challenges of using the tool

To decide upon standards and guidelines for tool implementation and usage

To estimate the costs and resources required for tool deployment and maintenance

Therefore, option C is not a valid objective of a pilot project, as it is not necessary to train all testers on using the tool at this stage. Training all testers on using the tool would be more appropriate after the tool has been selected and approved for full-scale implementation, and after the standards and guidelines have been established. Training all testers on using the tool during the pilot project would be inefficient, costly, and premature, as the tool may not be suitable or effective for the intended purpose, or may be replaced by another tool later.

References:

1: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 82

2: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 83

: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 84

: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 85

Sequential models, such as the Waterfall model, typically involve completing the requirements review before moving on to test analysis, as well as producing extensive product documentation (i and iv). Iterative and incremental models, like Agile and Spiral models, often involve both static and dynamic testing at the unit testing level, frequent regression testing due to continuous integration and changes, and more use of exploratory testing (ii, iii, and v).

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 2.1 on software development lifecycle models and their impact on testing, which discusses the characteristics and testing practices of different lifecycle models​​.

Exploratory testing is an experience-based test technique in which testers dynamically design and execute tests based on their knowledge, intuition, and learning of the software system, without following predefined test scripts or test cases. Exploratory testing can be conducted following a session-based approach, which is a structured way of managing and measuring exploratory testing. In a session-based approach, the testers perform uninterrupted test sessions, usually lasting between 60 and 120 minutes, with a specific charter or goal, and document the issues detected, the test coverage achieved, and the time spent in session sheets. Session sheets are records of the test activities, results, and observations during a test session, which can be used for reporting, debriefing, and learning purposes. The other statements are false, because:

Exploratory testing is not a test technique in which testers explore the requirements specification to detect non testable requirements, but rather a test technique in which testers explore the software system to detect functional and non-functional defects, as well as to learn new information, risks, or opportunities. Non testable requirements are requirements that are ambiguous, incomplete, inconsistent, or not verifiable, which can affect the quality and effectiveness of the testing process. Non testable requirements can be detected by applying static testing techniques, such as reviews or inspections, to the requirements specification, before the software system is developed or tested.

Exploratory testing is not a test technique used by testers during informal code reviews to find defects by exploring the source code, but rather a test technique used by testers during dynamic testing to find defects by exploring the behavior and performance of the software system, without examining the source code. Informal code reviews are static testing techniques, in which the source code is analyzed by one or more reviewers, without following a formal process or using a checklist, to identify defects, violations, or improvements. Informal code reviews are usually performed by developers or peers, not by testers.

In exploratory testing, testers usually do not produce scripted tests and establish bidirectional traceability between these tests and the items of the test basis, but rather produce unscripted tests and adapt them based on the feedback and the findings of the testing process. Scripted tests are tests that are designed and documented in advance, with predefined inputs, outputs, and expected results, and are executed according to a test plan or a test procedure. Bidirectional traceability is the ability to trace both forward and backward the relationships between the items of the test basis, such as the requirements, the design, the risks, etc., and the test artifacts, such as the test cases, the test results, the defects, etc. Scripted tests and bidirectional traceability are usually associated with more formal and structured testing approaches, such as specification-based or structure-based test techniques, not with exploratory testing. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.3, Experience-based Test Design Techniques1

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Exploratory Testing, Session-based Testing, Session Sheet, Non Testable Requirement, Static Testing, Informal Review, Dynamic Testing, Scripted Testing, Bidirectional Traceability2

A mature software testing company, especially one certified at TMMi level 5, is expected to have well-defined and adaptable processes. These companies recognize that test design techniques should be chosen based on the specific context of the project, including the domain and stakeholder expectations, rather than using a one-size-fits-all approach. This ensures that the testing is effective and aligned with project requirements.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 5.1 on test design techniques and their selection based on context​​.

The support offered by a performance testing tool is often leveraged by testers to run load tests, which are tests that simulate a large number of concurrent users or transactions on the system under test, in order to measure its performance, reliability, and scalability. Performance testing tools can help testers to generate realistic workloads, monitor system behavior, collect and analyze performance metrics, and identify performance bottlenecks. The other statements are false, because:

A test data preparation tool is a tool that helps testers to create, manage, and manipulate test data, which are the inputs and outputs of test cases. Test data preparation tools are not directly related to running automated regression test suites, which are test suites that verify that the system still works as expected after changes or modifications. Regression test suites are usually executed by test execution tools, which are tools that can automatically run test cases and compare actual results with expected results.

A bug prediction tool is a tool that uses machine learning or statistical techniques to predict the likelihood of defects in a software system, based on various factors such as code complexity, code churn, code coverage, code smells, etc. Bug prediction tools are not used by testers to track the bugs they found, which are the actual defects that have been detected and reported during testing. Bugs are usually tracked by defect management tools, which are tools that help testers to record, monitor, analyze, and resolve defects.

A continuous integration tool is a tool that enables the integration of code changes from multiple developers into a shared repository, and the execution of automated builds and tests, in order to ensure the quality and consistency of the software system. Continuous integration tools are not used by testers to automatically generate test cases from a model, which are test cases that are derived from a representation of the system under test, such as a state diagram, a decision table, a use case, etc. Test cases can be automatically generated by test design tools, which are tools that support the implementation and maintenance of test cases, based on test design specifications or test models. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 3.4.1, Types of Test Tools

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Performance Testing Tool, Test Data Preparation Tool, Bug Prediction Tool, Continuous Integration Tool, Test Execution Tool, Defect Management Tool, Test Design Tool

DevOps practices emphasize the importance of testing non-functional characteristics such as performance, security, and reliability. This focus ensures that the system not only meets functional requirements but also performs well under various conditions and is secure. DevOps promotes a continuous testing approach, which includes both functional and non-functional testing integrated into the development and deployment pipelines.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 2.1.4 on DevOps and testing, which highlights the role of DevOps in emphasizing non-functional characteristics​​.

The test leader is the person who is responsible for planning, monitoring, and controlling the test activities and resources in a test project. The test leader should have the best knowledge of the test objectives, scope, risks, resources, schedule, and quality criteria. The test leader should also be aware of the test automation criteria, such as the execution frequency, the test support, the team education, the roles and responsibilities, and the devs and testers collaboration1. Based on these factors, the test leader can decide which tests are suitable for automation and which are not, and prioritize them accordingly. The test leader can also coordinate with the test automation engineers, the developers, and the stakeholders to ensure the alignment of the test automation strategy with the test project goals and expectations. References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Syllabus, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, Page 152; ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Page 403; ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Syllabus, Chapter 6, Section 6.1.1, Page 514; Top 8 Test Automation Criteria You Need To Fulfill - QAMIND1

DevOps practices emphasize the importance of testing non-functional characteristics such as performance, security, and reliability. This focus ensures that the system not only meets functional requirements but also performs well under various conditions and is secure. DevOps promotes a continuous testing approach, which includes both functional and non-functional testing integrated into the development and deployment pipelines.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 2.1.4 on DevOps and testing, which highlights the role of DevOps in emphasizing non-functional characteristics​​.

This answer is correct because product risks are risks that affect the quality of the software product, such as defects, failures, or non-compliance with requirements or standards. Project risks are risks that affect the project’s schedule, budget, resources, or scope, such as delays, cost overruns, skill gaps, or scope changes. In this case, [I] and [IV] are product risks, as they relate to the accessibility and security of the software product, which are quality attributes. [II] and [III] are project risks, as they relate to the delivery time and the test automation skills of the test team, which are project factors. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.1.1.1

A new navigation system compared with a previous system is the most suitable application for testing by use cases, because it involves a high level of interaction between the user and the system, and the expected behavior and outcomes of the system are based on the user’s needs and goals. Use cases can help to specify the functional requirements of the new navigation system, such as the ability to enter a destination, select a route, follow the directions, receive alerts, etc. Use cases can also help to compare the accuracy and usability of the new system with the previous system, by defining the success and failure scenarios, the preconditions and postconditions, and the alternative flows of each use case. Use cases can also help to design and execute test cases that cover the main and exceptional paths of each use case, and to verify the satisfaction of the user’s expectations.

The other options are not the most suitable applications for testing by use cases, because they do not involve a high level of interaction between the user and the system, or the expected behavior and outcomes of the system are not based on the user’s needs and goals. A billing system used to calculate monthly charge based on a large number of subscriber parameters is more suitable for testing by data-driven testing, which is a technique for testing the functionality and performance of a system or component by using a large set of input and output data. The ability of an antivirus package to detect and quarantine a new threat is more suitable for testing by exploratory testing, which is a technique for testing the functionality and security of a system or component by using an informal and flexible approach, based on the tester’s experience and intuition. The suitability and performance of a multimedia (audio video based) system to a new operating system is more suitable for testing by compatibility testing, which is a technique for testing the functionality and performance of a system or component by using different hardware, software, or network environments. References = CTFL 4.0 Syllabus, Section 3.1.1, page 28-29; Section 4.1.1, page 44-45; Section 4.2.1, page 47-48.

The tests at the bottom layer of the test pyramid run faster than the tests at the top layer of the pyramid because they are more focused, isolated, and atomic. They usually test individual units or components of the software system, such as classes, methods, or functions. They are also easier to maintain and execute, as they have fewer dependencies and interactions with other parts of the system. The tests at the top layer of the test pyramid, on the other hand, are slower because they cover larger pieces of functionalities, such as user interfaces, workflows, or end-to-end scenarios. They also have more dependencies and interactions with other systems, such as databases, networks, or external services. They are more complex and costly to maintain and execute, as they require more setup and teardown procedures, test data, and test environments. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 3.2.1, Test Pyramid1

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Test Pyramid2

During the review planning phase of a formal review process, decisions are made regarding which standards and procedures will be followed. This planning ensures that the review process is structured, consistent, and aligned with organizational or project-specific guidelines, thereby enhancing the effectiveness and reliability of the review outcomes.

Cost can be regarded as an exit criterion for testing, because it is a factor that affects the profitability and feasibility of the software product. Testing is an investment that aims to improve the quality and reliability of the software product, but it also consumes resources, such as time, money, and human effort. Therefore, testing should be planned and executed in a way that balances the cost and benefit of testing activities. Having cost as an exit criterion helps to avoid spending too much money on testing, which may result in an unprofitable product or a loss of competitive advantage. Cost can also help to prioritize and focus the testing efforts on the most critical and valuable features and functions of the software product. However, cost should not be the only exit criterion for testing, as it may not reflect the true quality and risk level of the software product. Other exit criteria, such as defect rate, test coverage, user satisfaction, etc., should also be considered and defined in the test plan.

The other options are incorrect, because they either deny the importance of cost as an exit criterion, or they make false or unrealistic assumptions about the cost of testing. Option B is incorrect, because the financial value of product quality can be estimated, for example, by using cost-benefit analysis, return on investment, or cost of quality models. Option C is incorrect, because going by cost as an exit criterion does not necessarily constrain the testing project or help achieve the desired quality level. Cost is a relative and variable factor that depends on the scope, complexity, and context of the software product and the testing project. Option D is incorrect, because the cost of testing can be measured effectively, for example, by using metrics, such as test effort, test resources, test tools, test environment, etc.

The question is about selecting the correct test values for x based on equivalence partitioning. Equivalence partitioning is a software test design technique that divides the input data of a software unit into partitions of equivalent data from which test cases can be derived. In this case, the given equivalence classes are:

(x \leq -100)

(-100 < x < 100)

(100 \leq x < 1000)

(x \geq 1000)

Option D provides a value from each of these partitions:

For (x \leq -100), it gives -1000.

For (-100 < x < 100), it gives -100 and 100.

For (100 \leq x < 1000), it gives 500.

For (x \geq 1000), it gives 1500.

So, option D covers all four given equivalence classes with appropriate values.

References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 documents available at ISTQB and ASTQB.

1: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 38

2: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 39

: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 40

A test status report communicates the current status, progress, and issues encountered during testing to stakeholders. It is crucial for effective test management and decision-making.

Option A: Correct as it involves reporting impediments and solutions, which are essential for ongoing test activities.

Option B: Incorrect because test status reports are not limited to test completion activities and focus more on ongoing test status rather than final unmitigated risks.

Option C: Incorrect as the structure and contents of reports should be tailored to the audience's needs to ensure effective communication.

Option D: Incorrect because specifying communication lines is typically done in the test plan, not the status report.

Thus, option A best describes a key aspect of a test status report.

In the given state transition diagram, we need to identify the minimum number of test cases required to cover every unique sequence of exactly 4 states/3 transitions starting and ending in the "Inactive" state.

The states are:

Inactive

Active

Alert Mode

Alarm bell rings

Inactive -> Active -> Inactive -> Active -> Inactive

Sequence: Press Button, Enter PIN, Press Button, Enter PIN

Inactive -> Active -> Alert Mode -> Inactive

Sequence: Press Button, Sensor Activated, Enter PIN

Inactive -> Active -> Alert Mode -> Alarm bell rings -> Inactive

Sequence: Press Button, Sensor Activated, Timeout expired, Press Button

Test Case Analysis:These sequences cover every unique combination of exactly 4 states and 3 transitions starting and ending in the "Inactive" state.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus Section 4.2 on state transition testing​​.

This answer is correct because Behavior-Driven Development (BDD) is a test-first approach, where tests that express a shared understanding from stakeholders of how the application is expected to work, are first written in business-readable language (following the Given/When/Then format), and then made executable to drive development. BDD is a collaborative approach that involves testers, developers, business analysts, product owners, and other stakeholders in defining the expected behavior of the application using scenarios that describe the preconditions, actions, and outcomes of the application. BDD scenarios are written using a domain-specific language (DSL) that can be translated into executable test cases using tools such as Cucumber or SpecFlow. BDD aims to improve communication, collaboration, and feedback among the team members, and to deliver software that meets the customer’s needs and expectations. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 3.1.1.4

This answer is correct because in Agile software development, work product documentation, such as user stories, acceptance criteria, or test cases, tends to be lightweight and concise, as the focus is on working software and frequent communication rather than comprehensive documentation. Manual tests tend to be often unscripted, as they are often produced using experience-based test techniques, such as error guessing or exploratory testing, which rely on the tester’s skills, knowledge, and creativity to find defects and provide feedback. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 3.1.1.2, Section 3.2.1.2

Looking for defects in a system does not require ignoring system details, but rather paying attention to them and understanding how they affect the system’s quality, functionality, and usability. Ignoring system details could lead to missing important defects or testing irrelevant aspects of the system.

Identifying defects may be perceived as criticism against product, especially by the developers or stakeholders who are invested in the product’s success. However, identifying defects is not meant to be a personal attack, but rather a constructive feedback that helps to improve the product and ensure its alignment with the requirements and expectations of the users and clients.

Looking for defects in system requires professional pessimism and curiosity, as testers need to anticipate and explore the possible ways that the system could fail, malfunction, or behave unexpectedly. Professional pessimism means being skeptical and critical of the system’s quality and reliability, while curiosity means being eager and interested in finding out the root causes and consequences of the defects.

Testing is often seen as a destructive activity instead of constructive activity, as it involves finding and reporting the flaws and weaknesses of the system, rather than creating or enhancing it. However, testing is actually a constructive activity, as it contributes to the system’s improvement, verification, validation, and optimization, and ultimately to the delivery of a high-quality product that meets the needs and expectations of the users and clients.

A product risk is a risk that affects the quality or timeliness of the software product being developed or tested1. Product risks are related to the requirements, design, implementation, verification, and maintenance of the software product2.

The risk of the sub-contractor failing to meet his commitment is a product risk, as it could cause a delay in the completion of the testing required for the current cycle, which in turn could affect the release date of the product. The release date is an important aspect of the product quality, as it reflects the customer satisfaction and the market competitiveness of the product3.

The other options are not correct because:

A. It is not true that any risk associated with development timeline is a product risk. Some risks could be project risks, which are risks that affect the management or control of the software project, such as budget, resources, schedule, or communication1. For example, a risk of losing a key project stakeholder is a project risk, not a product risk.

B. It is not true that the risk is no longer a risk for the Test Manager since an independent party is managing it. The Test Manager is still responsible for ensuring that the testing activities are completed according to the test plan and the quality objectives4. The Test Manager should monitor and control the sub-contractor’s performance and communicate with him regularly to identify and mitigate any potential issues or deviations5.

C. It is not clear what is meant by “object” in this option, but it could be interpreted as the software system under test or the test object6. In any case, the risk is not an object risk, as it does not affect the successful completion of the object, but rather the successful completion of the testing of the object. An object risk could be a risk that affects the functionality, reliability, usability, efficiency, maintainability, or portability of the software system under test2. For example, a risk of the software system having a high complexity or a low testability is an object risk, not a product risk.

References =

1 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 97

2 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 98

3 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 99

4 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 100

5 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 101

6 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 102

When deciding on the order of test execution based on priorities and dependencies, the correct sequence should consider both the priority levels and any dependencies between test cases. Here’s the analysis:

Test B has the highest priority (1) and depends on Test D.

Test D should be executed before Test B.

Test C has a medium priority (2) and depends on Test A.

Test A can be executed at any time since it has no dependencies.

Considering these dependencies and priorities, Test D should be executed first, followed by Test B. After that, Test A and finally Test C. Therefore, the correct sequence is D-B-A-C​​.

The statement that refers to good testing practice to be applied regardless of the chosen software development model is option D, which says that involvement of testers in work product reviews should occur as early as possible to take advantage of the early testing principle. Work product reviews are static testing techniques, in which the work products of the software development process, such as the requirements, the design, the code, the test cases, etc., are examined by one or more reviewers, with or without the author, to identify defects, violations, or improvements. Involvement of testers in work product reviews can provide various benefits for the testing process, such as improving the test quality, the test efficiency, and the test communication. The early testing principle states that testing activities should start as early as possible in the software development lifecycle, and should be performed iteratively and continuously throughout the lifecycle. Applying the early testing principle can help to prevent, detect, and remove defects at an early stage, when they are easier, cheaper, and faster to fix, as well as to reduce the risk, the cost, and the time of the testing process. The other options are not good testing practices to be applied regardless of the chosen software development model, but rather specific testing practices that may or may not be applicable or beneficial for testing, depending on the context and the objectives of the testing activities, such as:

Tests should be written in executable format before the code is written and should act as executable specifications that drive coding: This is a specific testing practice that is associated with test-driven development, which is an approach to software development and testing, in which the developers write automated unit tests before writing the source code, and then refactor the code until the tests pass. Test-driven development can help to improve the quality, the design, and the maintainability of the code, as well as to provide fast feedback and guidance for the developers. However, test-driven development is not a good testing practice to be applied regardless of the chosen software development model, as it may not be feasible, suitable, or effective for testing in some contexts or situations, such as when the requirements are unclear, unstable, or complex, when the test automation tools or skills are not available or adequate, when the testing objectives or levels are not aligned with the unit testing, etc.

Test levels should be defined such that the exit criteria of one level are part of the entry criteria for the next level: This is a specific testing practice that is associated with sequential software development models, such as the waterfall model, the V-model, or the W-model, in which the software development and testing activities are performed in a linear and sequential order, with well-defined phases, deliverables, and dependencies. Test levels are the stages of testing that correspond to the levels of integration of the software system, such as component testing, integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing. Test levels should have clear and measurable entry criteria and exit criteria, which are the conditions that must be met before starting or finishing a test level. In sequential software development models, the exit criteria of one test level are usually part of the entry criteria for the next test level, to ensure that the software system is ready and stable for the next level of testing. However, this is not a good testing practice to be applied regardless of the chosen software development model, as it may not be relevant, flexible, or efficient for testing in some contexts or situations, such as when the software development and testing activities are performed in an iterative and incremental order, with frequent changes, feedback, and adaptations, as in agile software development models, such as Scrum, Kanban, or XP, when the test levels are not clearly defined or distinguished, or when the test levels are performed in parallel or concurrently, etc.

Test objectives should be the same for all test levels, although the number of tests designed at various levels can vary significantly: This is a specific testing practice that is associated with uniform software development models, such as the spiral model, the incremental model, or the prototyping model, in which the software development and testing activities are performed in a cyclical and repetitive manner, with similar phases, deliverables, and processes. Test objectives are the goals or the purposes of testing, which can vary depending on the test level, the test type, the test technique, the test environment, the test stakeholder, etc. Test objectives can be defined in terms of the test basis, the test coverage, the test quality, the test risk, the test cost, the test time, etc. Test objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound, and they should be aligned with the project objectives and the quality characteristics. In uniform software development models, the test objectives may be the same for all test levels, as the testing process is repeated for each cycle or iteration, with similar focus, scope, and perspective of testing. However, this is not a good testing practice to be applied regardless of the chosen software development model, as it may not be appropriate, realistic, or effective for testing in some contexts or situations, such as when the software development and testing activities are performed in a hierarchical and modular manner, with different phases, deliverables, and dependencies, as in sequential software development models, such as the waterfall model, the V-model, or the W-model, when the test objectives vary according to the test levels, such as component testing, integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing, or when the test objectives change according to the feedback, the learning, or the adaptation of the testing process, as in agile software development models, such as Scrum, Kanban, or XP, etc. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.1.1, Testing and the Software Development Lifecycle1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.2.1, Testing Principles1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.2.2, Testing Policies, Strategies, and Test Approaches1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.3.1, Testing in Software Development Lifecycles1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.1, Test Planning1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.2, Test Monitoring and Control1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.3, Test Analysis and Design1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.4, Test Implementation1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.5, Test Execution1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.6, Test Closure1

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Work Product Review, Static Testing, Early Testing, Test-driven Development, Test Level, Entry Criterion, Exit Criterion, Test Objective, Test Basis, Test Coverage, Test Quality, Test Risk, Test Cost, Test Time2

One of the generic skills required for the role of a tester is the ability to use tools to make the execution of repetitive testing tasks more efficient. This includes using various test automation tools to streamline the testing process, reduce manual effort, and improve the consistency and accuracy of test results. Testers should be proficient in leveraging these tools to enhance productivity and ensure comprehensive test coverage.

References:

ISTQB® CTFL Syllabus 4.0, Chapter 1.5.1, page 20: General Skills Required for Testing

Experience-based testing techniques are adopted for several reasons, most importantly because they can identify defects that might be missed by more systematic approaches like black-box and white-box testing. While systematic techniques follow predefined procedures and cover specific criteria, experience-based techniques leverage the tester's knowledge, intuition, and experience, which can be especially effective in uncovering subtle and complex issues.

Experience-based testing techniques include methods such as error guessing and exploratory testing. These methods rely on the tester’s background and intuition to predict where defects might be located and how the system might fail. These techniques are particularly useful in situations where the requirements and specifications are incomplete or ambiguous, and where creative and ad-hoc approaches can provide significant value.

References:

The official ISTQB® CTFL syllabus emphasizes that experience-based techniques can find defects that more systematic techniques might miss, which makes them valuable complements to other testing methods​​.

Experience-based testing techniques are adopted for several reasons, most importantly because they can identify defects that might be missed by more systematic approaches like black-box and white-box testing. While systematic techniques follow predefined procedures and cover specific criteria, experience-based techniques leverage the tester's knowledge, intuition, and experience, which can be especially effective in uncovering subtle and complex issues.

Experience-based testing techniques include methods such as error guessing and exploratory testing. These methods rely on the tester’s background and intuition to predict where defects might be located and how the system might fail. These techniques are particularly useful in situations where the requirements and specifications are incomplete or ambiguous, and where creative and ad-hoc approaches can provide significant value.

References:

The official ISTQB® CTFL syllabus emphasizes that experience-based techniques can find defects that more systematic techniques might miss, which makes them valuable complements to other testing methods​​.

Static testing involves reviewing the code, requirements, and design documents without executing the code. It is effective in finding certain types of bugs that do not require the code to be run. One common example of such a bug is variables that are declared but not initialized. These issues can be detected through code inspections or static analysis tools, which can identify uninitialized variables, missing declarations, and other coding standard violations without the need to execute the code​​.

This answer is correct because a walkthrough is a type of review where the author of the work product leads the review process and explains the work product to the reviewers. The reviewers are not required to prepare for the review in advance, and the main objective of the walkthrough is to establish a common understanding of the work product and to identify any major defects or issues. A walkthrough is usually informal and does not follow a defined process or roles. In this case, the review for a high-level architectural document written by a software architect matches the characteristics of a walkthrough. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.4.2.2

In an agile software development environment with distributed teams, effective communication is crucial. Given the distributed nature and the time zone differences, asynchronous communication methods such as emails are more practical and effective. They ensure that information can be shared and accessed by team members and stakeholders at their convenience, regardless of time zone differences. Regular email updates also provide a documented trail of communication, which can be reviewed and referred back to as needed. Formal face-to-face meetings can be challenging to coordinate across time zones and are not as flexible as email communications​​.

The best example of a test case for this user story should cover the acceptance criteria comprehensively. Option A addresses the critical aspects of the acceptance criteria:

Verifying the discount for the first timeslot (8 AM GMT) - ensuring it provides a 10% discount.

Verifying that changing the time slot removes the discount - ensuring the discount logic is correctly applied.

This test case effectively validates the functionality related to both the discount and the ability to change time slots, which are key parts of the user story's requirements​​.

Traceability is the ability to trace the relationships between the items of the test basis, such as the requirements, the design, the risks, etc., and the test artifacts, such as the test cases, the test results, the defects, etc. Traceability can provide various benefits for the testing process, such as improving the test coverage, the test quality, the test efficiency, and the test communication. However, not all the statements given are true about the value of maintaining traceability between the test basis and test work products. The statement that is not true is option C, which says that test objectives should be the same for all test levels, although the number of tests designed at various levels can vary significantly. This statement is false, because test objectives are the goals or the purposes of testing, which can vary depending on the test level, the test type, the test technique, the test environment, the test stakeholder, etc. Test objectives can be defined in terms of the test basis, the test coverage, the test quality, the test risk, the test cost, the test time, etc. Test objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound, and they should be aligned with the project objectives and the quality characteristics. Test objectives should not be the same for all test levels, as different test levels have different focuses, scopes, and perspectives of testing, such as component testing, integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing. The other statements are true about the value of maintaining traceability between the test basis and test work products, such as:

Traceability can be useful for assessing the impact of a change to a test basis item on the corresponding tests: This statement is true, because traceability can help to identify which tests are affected by a change in the test basis, such as a new requirement, a modified design, a revised risk, etc., and to determine the necessary actions to update, re-execute, or re-evaluate the tests. Traceability can also help to estimate the effort, the cost, and the time needed to implement the change and to verify its impact on the software system.

Traceability can be useful for determining how many test basis items are covered by the corresponding tests: This statement is true, because traceability can help to measure the test coverage, which is the degree to which the test basis is exercised by the test cases. Traceability can help to identify which test basis items are covered, partially covered, or not covered by the tests, and to evaluate the adequacy, the completeness, and the effectiveness of the testing process. Traceability can also help to identify the gaps, the overlaps, or the redundancies in the test coverage, and to prioritize, optimize, or improve the test cases.

Traceability can be useful to support the needs required by the auditing of testing: This statement is true, because traceability can help to provide evidence, documentation, and justification for the testing activities, results, and outcomes. Traceability can help to demonstrate that the testing process follows the standards, the regulations, the policies, and the best practices that are applicable to the software system, the project, or the organization. Traceability can also help to verify that the testing process meets the expectations, the needs, and the satisfaction of the users and the stakeholders. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.2.2, Testing Policies, Strategies, and Test Approaches1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.1, Test Planning1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.2, Test Monitoring and Control1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.3, Test Analysis and Design1

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Traceability, Test Basis, Test Artifact, Test Objective, Test Level, Test Coverage, Test Quality, Test Risk, Test Cost, Test Time2

A configuration management tool helps in maintaining and managing changes to software, including test cases. It ensures that changes are tracked and can be retrieved if needed. In this scenario, using a configuration management tool would have allowed Sam's updates to be stored in a central repository, preventing the loss of his work even if his PC's hard disk crashed.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 5.4 on configuration management, which describes the role of configuration management tools in maintaining control over changes​​.

During the review planning phase of a formal review process, decisions are made regarding which standards and procedures will be followed. This planning ensures that the review process is structured, consistent, and aligned with organizational or project-specific guidelines, thereby enhancing the effectiveness and reliability of the review outcomes.

Exploratory testing is characterized by its reliance on the skills and experience of the tester. The effectiveness of exploratory testing depends heavily on the tester's ability to design and execute tests based on their intuition and knowledge of the application. This type of testing is often performed without predefined test cases, making the individual tester's expertise crucial.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 4.4 on experience-based testing techniques, including exploratory testing, which highlights the importance of the tester's skills​​.

Maintenance testing is performed to ensure that the application continues to function correctly after changes have been made. These changes can include modifications due to new regulations, bug fixes, enhancements, or any other updates. In this case, the change in the protocol for connecting to the payment gateway due to new regulations falls under maintenance testing, as it involves testing the application to ensure it works correctly after the implementation of the required changes​​.

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

The absence-of-errors fallacy is one of the seven testing principles mentioned in the ISTQB syllabus. This principle states that even if no defects are found in the software, it does not guarantee that the software is usable and meets the user needs and expectations. By involving users early in the development process through practices like prototyping, the team can gather feedback to ensure that the software aligns with user expectations, thereby addressing the risk of this fallacy.

This answer is correct because error guessing is a test design technique where the experience and intuition of the tester are used to anticipate where errors, defects and failures have occurred or are likely to occur, and to design test cases to expose them. Error guessing can be based on factors such as the complexity of the system or component, the known or suspected weaknesses of the system or component, the previous history of defects, or the common types of errors in the domain or technology. Error guessing can be used as a complementary technique to other more systematic or formal techniques, or when there is insufficient information or time to apply them. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.3.2.5

The "absence-of-defects fallacy" in software development refers to the mistaken belief that if a software system has been thoroughly tested and all requirements have been met without any defects, it guarantees the success of the system. However, this is not necessarily true. Even if no defects are found, the system might still fail to meet the user's needs or business objectives. This fallacy highlights the importance of validation in addition to verification to ensure that the system fulfills the intended use and requirements​​.

Cost can be regarded as an exit criterion for testing, because it is a factor that affects the profitability and feasibility of the software product. Testing is an investment that aims to improve the quality and reliability of the software product, but it also consumes resources, such as time, money, and human effort. Therefore, testing should be planned and executed in a way that balances the cost and benefit of testing activities. Having cost as an exit criterion helps to avoid spending too much money on testing, which may result in an unprofitable product or a loss of competitive advantage. Cost can also help to prioritize and focus the testing efforts on the most critical and valuable features and functions of the software product. However, cost should not be the only exit criterion for testing, as it may not reflect the true quality and risk level of the software product. Other exit criteria, such as defect rate, test coverage, user satisfaction, etc., should also be considered and defined in the test plan.

The other options are incorrect, because they either deny the importance of cost as an exit criterion, or they make false or unrealistic assumptions about the cost of testing. Option B is incorrect, because the financial value of product quality can be estimated, for example, by using cost-benefit analysis, return on investment, or cost of quality models. Option C is incorrect, because going by cost as an exit criterion does not necessarily constrain the testing project or help achieve the desired quality level. Cost is a relative and variable factor that depends on the scope, complexity, and context of the software product and the testing project. Option D is incorrect, because the cost of testing can be measured effectively, for example, by using metrics, such as test effort, test resources, test tools, test environment, etc.

Test-Driven Development (TDD) includes refactoring as a key practice. After writing tests and the code to satisfy those tests, refactoring is performed to improve the code and test quality without changing the functionality. This continuous process helps maintain clean, efficient, and manageable code.

References:

ISTQB® CTFL Syllabus 4.0, Chapter 2.1.3, page 25: TDD, ATDD, and BDD Practices​