CTFL_Syll2018 ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (Syllabus 2018) Questions and Answers

A functional test is a dynamic test for which the tests are based on the specification of the test object. This means that the test cases and test data are derived from the functional requirements, use cases, user stories, or other sources that describe the expected behavior and functionality of the system under test. A functional test is not focused on the efficiency of the system (that would be a performance test), nor is it a static comparison of test and requirements specification (that would be a review or inspection), nor is it based on the structure of the test object (that would be a structural test).

References:

• Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus - ISTQB Guru1, page 10
• Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) Syllabus - ASTQB2, page 65
• A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer3, page 77

Code coverage can be used to ensure that all code is exercised by tests, because it measures how much of the code or functionality of the software under test has been exercised by the test cases . Code coverage can help to identify untested or dead code, improve test design, and assess test quality . The other options are not true statements about code coverage. Option A is false, because 100% code coverage does not imply 100% coverage of requirements, as there may be defects or gaps in the requirements or in the mapping between requirements and code . Option B is false, because 100% code coverage does not guarantee that there are no coding errors, as there may be logical or functional errors that are not detected by code coverage . Option D is false, because code coverage does not ensure that all decisions are correctly implemented in the code, as it only measures whether the decisions are executed or not, but not whether they produce the correct results .

The pesticide paradox principle of testing states that if we do not regularly review and revise our tests, we’ll stop finding defects, because the same tests will no longer be effective at detecting new or different defects in the software12. The other options do not explain the pesticide paradox principle of testing. Option B is false, because repeatedly running a set of tests will not ensure that a system is defect free, but rather that it meets the same quality criteria as before12. Option C is related to the defect clustering principle of testing, which states that defects are often contained in a small number of modules12. Option D is a metaphor that compares testing to spraying pesticide, but it does not explain the paradoxical effect of using the same tests over and over again

Effort estimate depends on the budget of the project is the wrong statement about estimation of the test effort, because it confuses the cause and effect relationship between effort estimate and budget. Effort estimate does not depend on the budget of the project, but rather influences it. Effort estimate is an approximation of how much time and resources are needed for testing activities based on various factors such as scope, complexity, risks, quality, etc. . Budget is the amount of money that is allocated or available for testing activities based on the effort estimate . The other options are true statements about estimation of the test effort. Option A is true, because effort estimate can be inaccurate because the quality of the product under test is not known, which affects the number and severity of defects that need to be detected and fixed . Option B is true, because once the test effort is estimated, resources can be identified and a schedule can be drawn up, which are part of test planning . Option C is true, because experience based estimation is one of the estimation techniques that relies on the judgement and expertise of testers or other stakeholders who have previous knowledge or experience with similar projects .

The combination of the conditions Valid Card Number (NO) + Purchase Approved (YES) is not feasible, as a purchase cannot be approved with an invalid card number. Therefore, this combination can be ignored in the equivalence partitioning for the different types of credit card. Each type of credit card has two valid equivalence partitions: Valid Card Number (YES) + Purchase Approved (YES) and Valid Card Number (YES) + Purchase Approved (NO). Each type of credit card also has one invalid equivalence partition: Valid Card Number (NO) + Purchase Approved (NO). Therefore, to cover all the combinations of equivalence partitions for the four types of credit card, we need 4 x (2 + 1) = 12 test cases.

A, B, and D are incorrect answers. A implies that there are two equivalence partitions for each type of credit card, which is not true as there are three. B implies that there is only one equivalence partition for each type of credit card, which is not true as there are two valid ones and one invalid one. D implies that there are four equivalence partitions for each type of credit card, which is not true as there are only three.

Black-box testing and white-box testing are two approaches to test design that differ in the way they derive test cases from the test basis. Black-box testing is based on an analysis of the test basis documentation, such as requirements, specifications, user stories, or use cases, without looking at the internal structure or code of the system under test. White-box testing is based on an analysis of the code itself, such as statements, branches, paths, or data flows, to design test cases that cover specific aspects of the code. Black-box testing focuses on the external behavior and functionality of the system, while white-box testing focuses on the internal logic and structure of the system.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.3

 According to the syllabus, dynamic analysis tools are tools that perform testing or analysis by executing the software or a part of it. Dynamic analysis tools can help detect defects or problems that only appear during runtime, such as memory leaks, performance issues, concurrency errors, etc. The answer A is correct because it suggests using a dynamic analysis tool for detecting a memory leak during performance testing. A memory leak is a situation where a code component fails to release memory after it has finished using it, causing memory exhaustion and degradation of performance. A dynamic analysis tool can monitor the memory usage of the code component and identify any memory leaks. The other answers are incorrect because they suggest using tools that are not suitable for detecting memory leaks during performance testing. A test execution tool is a tool that executes test cases automatically or semi-automatically. A configuration management tool is a tool that controls and tracks changes to the software components and documentation. A coverage measurement tool is a tool that measures how much of the code or functionality has been exercised by a test suite.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.6.1, page 53-54.

The introduction of a test management tool does not represent one of the three triggers for maintenance testing an operational system, because it does not affect the functionality or performance of the system itself. Maintenance testing is triggered by system modification (such as corrective, adaptive, perfective or preventive changes), data migration (such as moving data from one platform or format to another), or system retirement (such as decommissioning or replacing an old system)1 .

The goal of statement testing is to increase the percentage of executable statements that are exercised by a test set. This is also known as statement coverage or line coverage3 defines this as follows:

Statement Coverage (also known as Line Coverage) measures how many statements have been executed by your tests. It’s calculated by dividing the number of executed statements by total number statements in source code file.

Statement testing does not aim to reduce the number of tests needed to test the system (A), assess the correctness of key statements in each module of the application (B), or assess the number of code statements needed to implement each feature (D).

Test metrics are quantitative measures that are used to monitor, control, and improve the test process and its outcomes. Test metrics can be collected at different levels of testing (test case, test suite, test project, etc.) and can be used for different purposes (planning, estimation, execution, evaluation, etc.). Some examples of common test metrics are:

• Percentage of work done in test environment creation: This metric indicates how much effort has been spent on setting up and maintaining the test environment, which includes hardware, software, network, data, tools, etc., that are required for conducting the test activities.
• Number of test cases run: This metric indicates how many test cases have been executed during a given period or phase of testing.
• Deviation from test milestone dates: This metric indicates how much delay or ahead of schedule the test activities are compared to the planned dates.
• Defect density: This metric indicates how many defects have been found per unit of size or functionality of the system under test.

Average number of expected defects per requirement is not a common test metric because it is not easy to estimate or measure how many defects are likely to be found for each requirement. Moreover, this metric does not provide useful information for improving the test process or evaluating the test results. You can find more information about test metrics in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 5, Section 5.41.

Statement testing is part of structure-based testing, which is a type of testing that verifies the internal structure or implementation of a software system, such as code, architecture, design, etc. Statement testing is a structure-based test technique that involves testing every statement in the code at least once to ensure that there are no syntax errors, logical errors, or hidden defects in the code. Statement testing requires some knowledge of the internal structure or implementation of the software system; it focuses on how the system does what it does rather than what it does.

The other types of testing mentioned in the question are not related to statement testing because they do not verify the internal structure or implementation of a software system. For example:

• A. Experience-based testing: This type of testing relies on the skills, knowledge, intuition, and creativity of testers to design and execute test cases based on their experience with similar systems or situations.
• B. Decision testing: This type of testing verifies every decision point in the code by testing all possible outcomes or branches of each decision point to ensure that there are no logical errors or hidden defects in the code.
• C. Specification-based testing: This type of testing verifies the external behavior or functionality of a software system based on its requirements, specifications, design documents, or other sources of information.

You can find more information about statement testing and structure-based testing in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.3.

Pair programming is a software development technique where two programmers work together on the same code at the same workstation. One programmer, called the driver, writes the code while the other programmer, called the navigator, reviews the code and provides feedback and suggestions. Pair programming is not only a coding technique but also an informal review method because it involves constant communication and collaboration between the programmers who check each other’s work and share their knowledge and skills. Pair programming can improve the quality and productivity of software development by reducing defects, increasing code readability, enhancing learning opportunities, and fostering creativity and innovation. Pair programming is usually used in agile methods such as Extreme Programming (XP), Scrum, or Kanban. It is not an alternative term for code inspection, which is a formal review method where a group of reviewers examine a piece of code in a structured and systematic way following predefined rules and roles. It is also not done with developer and tester pairing together because pair programming requires both programmers to have similar levels of expertise and familiarity with the code they are working on. You can find more information about pair programming in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 31.

The V-model is a development life cycle model that shows the relationship between each phase of development and its corresponding phase of testing. In this model, each level of testing (unit testing, integration testing, system testing, acceptance testing) has a corresponding level of development (component design, component integration, system design, requirements analysis). The model also shows that testing activities should start as early as possible in the development process and that each level of testing should be planned and designed in parallel with its corresponding level of development. Therefore, one of the roles of a tester in a software company that adopts the V-model is to coordinate the test strategy with the project managers who are responsible for planning and managing each phase of development. This role involves defining the scope, objectives, approach, resources, schedule, risks, and deliverables of each level of testing in alignment with the development plan and the project requirements. You can find more information about the V-model and test planning in Software Testing Foundations: A Study Guide for the Certified Tester Exam, Chapter 22.

Testing has several objectives that aim to provide information and confidence about the quality and risk level of the software product and to support decision-making and improvement processes. Some of these objectives are:

• Finding defects: Testing is the process of finding defects or failures in the software product that do not meet its requirements or expectations.
• Providing information for decision-making: Testing is the process of providing information about the quality and risk level of the software product based on the observed behavior and results under certain conditions and assumptions. This information can help stakeholders make informed decisions about releasing, deploying, accepting, or improving the software product.
• Gaining confidence about the level of quality of the software: Testing is the process of gaining confidence that the software product meets its requirements and expectations and provides value to the users and customers.
• Analyzing and removing the cause of failures: Testing is not only the process of finding defects but also the process of analyzing and removing the cause of failures that lead to defects. This objective is related to debugging, which is a development activity that involves locating, diagnosing, and fixing errors in the code or design of the software product.

You can find more information about the objectives of testing in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 1, Section 1.2.

The requirement given in the image specifies a field asking for the number of group members, which can be anywhere from 2 to 20 visitors. To test this requirement, we can use boundary value analysis, which is a specification-based test technique that involves testing the values at or near the boundaries of an equivalence partition. An equivalence partition is a set of values that are expected to be treated in the same way by the system under test. For example, based on the requirement, we can identify two equivalence partitions for the input group size:

• EP1: Group size < 2 (invalid)
• EP2: Group size = 2 (valid)
• EP3: 2 < Group size < 20 (valid)
• EP4: Group size = 20 (valid)
• EP5: Group size > 20 (invalid)

The boundary values for each equivalence partition are the values at or near the edges of the partition. For example, the boundary values for EP1 are -1 and 1. The boundary values for EP2 are 1 and 2. The boundary values for EP3 are 2 and 19. And so on.

To test this requirement using boundary value analysis, we need to select one value from each boundary and test it with different combinations of valid and invalid inputs. For example, we can select the following values:

• BV1: Group size = -1 (from EP1)
• BV2: Group size = 1 (from EP1 and EP2)
• BV3: Group size = 2 (from EP2 and EP3)
• BV4: Group size = 19 (from EP3 and EP4)
• BV5: Group size = 20 (from EP4 and EP5)
• BV6: Group size = 21 (from EP5)

We can then create test cases using these values and different combinations of valid and invalid inputs. For example:

• TC1: Group size = -1 -> Invalid input
• TC2: Group size = 1 -> Invalid input
• TC3: Group size = 2 -> Valid input
• TC4: Group size = 19 -> Valid input
• TC5: Group size = 20 -> Valid input
• TC6: Group size = 21 -> Invalid input

Therefore, we need a minimum of 6 valid test cases to achieve 100% boundary value coverage based on input group size.

You can find more information about boundary value analysis in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.2.

Test techniques are methods or procedures that can be used to design, execute, or evaluate test cases. Test techniques can be classified into two categories: specification-based and structure-based. Specification-based test techniques, also known as black-box test techniques, are based on the requirements, specifications, or expectations of the system under test. They do not require any knowledge of the internal structure or implementation of the system. Some examples of specification-based test techniques are use case testing, state transition testing, decision table testing, etc. Structure-based test techniques, also known as white-box test techniques, are based on the code, architecture, or design of the system under test. They require some knowledge of the internal structure or implementation of the system. Some examples of structure-based test techniques are control flow testing, data flow testing, branch testing, statement testing, etc. You can find more information about test techniques in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 41.

Beta testing is a type of acceptance testing that is normally performed by customers or potential customers at their own locations. Beta testing is done after the software product has passed the internal testing and quality assurance processes and is ready for release or deployment. Beta testing allows the customers or users to evaluate the software product in their real environment and provide feedback and suggestions for improvement. Beta testing can also help identify defects, compatibility issues, usability problems, or performance bottlenecks that might not have been detected during the internal testing. You can find more information about beta testing in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 2, Section 2.3.

The correct logical order for the test cases is 3, 1, 4, 2, 6, 5. This order follows the logical sequence of actions that a user would perform to book a flight using a web-based airline booking system. The order also respects the dependencies between test cases, such as logging in before searching for flights or booking a flight before printing a confirmation receipt . The other options are incorrect logical orders for the test cases. Option A does not follow the logical sequence of actions and does not respect the dependencies between test cases. For example, it starts with confirming details and booking a flight before logging in or selecting a flight. Option B does not follow the logical sequence of actions and does not respect the dependencies between test cases. For example, it starts with selecting a flight before logging in or searching for flights. Option C does not follow the logical sequence of actions and does not respect the dependencies between test cases. For example, it starts with viewing selected items in My Flights before selecting any flights.

State transition testing is the most suitable test technique for this situation. State transition testing is a technique that uses scenarios based on state diagrams to test the behavior of a system or component that can change its state in response to events or inputs. A state diagram is a graphical representation of the states that a system or component can be in, the events or inputs that can trigger a change of state (transitions), and the actions or outputs that can occur as a result of a change of state. In this case, the vending machine for light drinks can be modeled as a state diagram with states such as “idle”, “coins inserted”, “drink selected”, “drink dispensed”, “change returned”, “sold out”, etc., and transitions triggered by events such as “button pressed”, “coins inserted”, “drink dispensed”, “change returned”, etc. State transition testing can help design test cases that cover all the possible states and transitions of the vending machine and verify its functionality and usability.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.5.1

Use case testing does not find defects caused by interaction of different components is the statement that is false about use case testing. Use case testing is a technique to create test cases based on use cases, which are descriptions of how a system interacts with one or more actors (users or other systems) to achieve a specific goal or function. Use case testing can find defects caused by interaction of different components, as use cases often involve multiple components working together to provide a service or functionality to an actor2 explains use case testing as follows:

Use case testing is a technique that helps us identify test cases that exercise the whole system on a transaction by transaction basis from start to finish. It is a functional black box testing technique.

Use cases are prepared by analysts and domain experts who document the functional requirements of a system from an end-user perspective. Each use case typically has a mainstream scenario and may have alternate or exceptional scenarios that describe different paths or outcomes.

Use case testing can help to verify that all the interactions between actors and the system under test work as expected and meet the user requirements. It can also help to detect integration defects between different components or subsystems.

A, B, and D are correct statements about use case testing. Use case generally has a mainstream scenario and may have many alternate or exceptional scenarios (A), as use cases describe different paths or outcomes depending on various conditions or events. A use case can be defined at different levels of abstraction, such as user goal level, summary level, subfunction level, etc., but not at the abstract level detached from the implementation or at the system level describing a set of executed functions (B), as use cases always describe interactions between actors and systems rather than abstract concepts or functions. Each use case has preconditions which need to be met for the use case to work successfully (D), as preconditions specify what must be true before a use case can begin.

Traceability between the test basis and test work products means that there is a clear and documented relationship between the requirements, design, and other sources of test conditions, and the test cases, test procedures, and test results that are derived from them. This helps to ensure that the test work products are consistent, complete, and relevant to the test basis. One of the direct benefits of maintaining traceability is the ability to analyse the impact of changes in the test basis on the test work products, and vice versa. For example, if a requirement is changed, added, or deleted, traceability can help to identify which test cases, test procedures, and test results need to be updated, executed, or removed accordingly. Similarly, if a test result reveals a defect in the test basis, traceability can help to locate the source of the defect and determine the scope of the correction. Traceability also supports other benefits, such as measuring test coverage, reporting test progress, and evaluating test quality, but these are not direct benefits of maintaining traceability, rather they are outcomes of using traceability information for various purposes. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 3.1.2, p. 23-24 1; ISTQB Glossary v4.0, p. 67 2

Test Cases 1, 2 and 3 are all valid, because they cover all the possible combinations of conditions and actions in the decision table. Test Case 1 covers the case where the employee is not a car or motorcycle driver, which leads to the action of not allowing the expense claim. Test Case 2 covers the case where the employee drives a diesel car with an engine size greater than 1600cc, which leads to the action of accepting the expense claim at band C. Test Case 3 covers the case where the employee rides a motorcycle, which leads to the action of accepting the expense claim at band A12.

According to the syllabus, a defect report is a document that records the occurrence, nature, and status of a defect. A defect report typically includes several fields that provide relevant information about the defect, such as its title, description, priority, status, environment, steps to reproduce, expected result, actual result, etc. The answer A is correct because it suggests adding severity as an additional defect report field. Severity is a measure of the impact of a defect on the system or its users. Severity can help prioritize defects and decide whether they need to be fixed or not. The other answers are incorrect because they suggest adding fields that are already present in the defect report. Test script id is not necessary for a defect report, as it can be inferred from the steps to reproduce. Actual results and expected results are already included in the defect report under what occurred and what should have occurred.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 5.2.1, page 58-59.

 Load testing is the type of non-functional testing that would verify these requirements, because it measures how well the system performs under normal or expected load conditions1 . Load testing can verify whether up to 100 users can carry out a transaction simultaneously and whether the response time is within 5 seconds1 . The other options are not relevant types of non-functional testing for these requirements. Stress testing measures how well the system performs under extreme or abnormal load conditions1 . Maintenance testing verifies whether an operational system still works correctly after changes or updates1 . Usability testing evaluates how easy and user-friendly the system is for its intended users1 .

Use case testing is a technique that uses scenarios based on use cases to test the functionality and usability of a system from the user’s perspective. A use case is a description of how a system interacts with one or more actors (users or other systems) to achieve a specific goal. A typical benefit of use case testing is finding failures in the business process flows, which highlight system use in the real world. This is because use case testing focuses on how the system is used by different actors in different situations, rather than on individual components or features of the system.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.5.2

It is not allowed as organizations can’t change the test levels as these are chosen on the basis of the SDLC (software development life cycle) model. The V-model is a type of SDLC model that defines four test levels: component testing, integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing. Each test level corresponds to a development phase in a parallel manner. Integration testing is an essential part of the V-model, as it verifies that the components work together correctly and consistently2 explains this as follows:

The V-model is a graphical representation of a systems development lifecycle. It is used to produce rigorous development lifecycle models and project management models. The V-model falls into three broad categories, the German V-Modell, a general testing model and the US government standard.

The V-model summarizes the main steps to be taken in conjunction with the corresponding deliverables within project execution and delivery. It describes software development activities from requirements specification to maintenance.

The V-Model demonstrates the relationships between each phase of the development life cycle and its associated phase of testing.

A, C, and D are incorrect answers. A implies that integration testing is not an important test level and can be dispensed with, which is not true as integration testing ensures that the system functions as a whole and meets its requirements. C implies that organizations can decide on which test levels to do depending on the context of the system under test, which is not true as test levels are determined by the chosen SDLC model and its objectives. D implies that integration testing is a very important test level and ignoring it means definite poor product quality, which is true but not relevant to why it is not allowed to do away with integration testing in a V-model.

According to the syllabus, exploratory testing is a technique that involves simultaneous learning, test design and test execution. A tester dynamically designs and executes tests based on their knowledge, exploration of the test item and the results of previous tests. A time-boxed test session is a fixed period of time during which testing is performed. A test charter is a document that contains test objectives, scope, risks and other information to guide the testing. The answer A is correct because it describes an approach that can be used for exploratory testing. The other answers are incorrect because they describe other techniques, such as error guessing (B), compliance testing © and user acceptance testing (D).

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.5.2, page 51-52.

 Boundary value analysis and decision table testing are the best choice of one black box technique and one white box technique for test case design2. A black box technique is a technique that uses the external behaviour or specification of a system as a test basis to derive test cases without referring to its internal structure or logic2. A white box technique is a technique that uses the internal structure or logic of a system as a test basis to derive test cases and measure test coverage2. In this question, the system has complex business rules and many branches in the structure of its code components. Therefore, we need to choose a black box technique that can handle complex business rules and a white box technique that can cover many branches.

• Boundary value analysis is a black box technique that tests the values at or near the boundaries of an equivalence partition2. Boundary value analysis can handle complex business rules by identifying the boundary conditions that may cause errors or exceptions in the system’s behaviour2.
• Decision table testing is a white box technique that tests all possible combinations of conditions and actions in a decision logic2. Decision table testing can cover many branches by creating a table that shows how each condition affects each action and then deriving test cases from each row of the table2.

Therefore, boundary value analysis and decision table testing are the best choice of one black box technique and one white box technique for test case design.

According to the syllabus, the absence-of-errors fallacy is a common misconception that finding and fixing defects will ensure the success of a system. This fallacy ignores the fact that there may be other factors that affect user satisfaction and system value, such as usability, functionality, performance, reliability, security, etc. The answer D is correct because it is an example of the absence-of-errors fallacy. Since testing found very few defects, the system certainly will be successful. This statement assumes that defect detection is the only criterion for system success, which is not true. The other answers are incorrect because they are not examples of the absence-of-errors fallacy, but rather facts or challenges related to testing.

References: [Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus], Section 1.2.1, page 11.

Testing the ease of modification of systems is the statement that is least likely to be true of non-functional testing. Non-functional testing is testing of the non-functional aspects of a system or software component, such as performance, usability, reliability, security, etc. Non-functional testing does not usually include testing the ease of modification of systems, as this is more related to maintainability, which is a quality attribute rather than a non-functional requirement1 defines non-functional testing as follows:

Non-functional Testing is defined as a type of Software testing to check non-functional aspects (performance, usability, reliability, etc) of a software application. It is designed to test the readiness of a system as per nonfunctional parameters which are never addressed by functional testing.

Non-functional Testing involves testing of non-functional requirements such as Load Testing, Stress Testing, Security, Volume, Recovery Testing etc. The objective of NFT testing is to ensure whether the response time of software or application is quick enough as per the business requirement.

A, B, and D are incorrect answers. Evaluating the interaction of various specified components (A), testing how the system works (B), and performing at unit, integration, system and acceptance test levels (D) are statements that are likely to be true of non-functional testing. Non-functional testing can cover the interaction of various components in terms of performance, reliability, compatibility, etc. Non-functional testing can test how the system works in terms of speed, efficiency, stability, etc. Non-functional testing can be performed at different test levels depending on the scope and objectives of the test.

A test execution tool is a tool that executes tests on a software system and logs the outcomes of each test step. The ability of the tool to run the unit-level tests for the developers is one of the factors that should be considered when purchasing a test execution tool, as it can improve the efficiency and effectiveness of testing at this level. The other options are not relevant to test execution tools, but to other types of tools such as test management tools, test measurement tools, and requirements management tools. References: Section 6.1.1, Section 6.3.2

The attributes that best match each level of testing are as follows14:

• Component testing: Stubs and drivers are often used (I), as they simulate the behavior of missing or incomplete components.
• Integration testing: Testing for functional and non-functional characteristics (VI), as integration testing verifies that components interact correctly and meet their specified requirements.
• System testing: The test environment should correspond to the production environment (II), as system testing evaluates the system’s compliance with its specified requirements under realistic conditions.
• Acceptance testing: Testing can be based on use cases (IV), as acceptance testing validates that the system meets the user’s needs and expectations

Explanation of Correct Answer: A benefit of running tests with a test automation tool is that the time spent on repetitive tasks is reduced, as the tool can execute tests faster and more reliably than humans. Therefore, option D is correct. Option A is incorrect, as test coverage is not increased by using a test automation tool, but by designing more effective test cases. Option B is incorrect, as the number of found bugs is not reduced by using a test automation tool, but by improving the quality of the software under test. Option C is incorrect, as the total cost of the test project does not always decrease by using a test automation tool, as there are costs associated with developing and maintaining the automated tests.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 6.1

The statement that component testing tests interfaces between modules and interactions of different parts of a system does not describe component testing. Component testing is the process of testing individual software components that are separately testable, such as modules, programs, objects, classes, etc. Component testing verifies the functionality and quality of the components in isolation from other components. Component testing does not test the interfaces or interactions between components, as this is done in integration testing.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 5.1.2

The statement that best characterizes maintenance testing is A. Maintenance testing is triggered by changes to delivered software and uses impact analysis to minimize the amount of regression testing needed. Maintenance testing is a type of testing that is performed on a software product after it has been delivered to the customer or user, and aims to ensure that the software product still meets its requirements and expectations after any changes or modifications. Maintenance testing is triggered by changes to delivered software, such as bug fixes, enhancements, patches, updates, etc., and uses impact analysis to determine the scope and extent of regression testing needed. Impact analysis is a technique that analyzes the potential effects of changes on the existing software product and its components, dependencies, interfaces, etc., and identifies which parts of the software product need to be retested or modified. Impact analysis helps to minimize the amount of regression testing needed by focusing on the most affected or critical parts of the software product. A detailed explanation of maintenance testing can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 81-82.

System testing is a test level that focuses on testing the system as a whole against its requirements and specifications. System testing applies to both functional and non-functional aspects of the system, such as functionality, performance, reliability, usability, security, etc. System testing has several objectives, such as:

• Satisfying legal requirements, such as compliance with standards or regulations.
• Using system specifications as a test basis, such as system requirements, system design, user stories, or use cases.
• Establishing confidence in the system, such as its readiness for release or deployment, its suitability for use, its quality and reliability, etc.

Therefore, statements a and b apply to system testing.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 5.2.2

Finding defects, gaining confidence about the level of quality and providing information, and preventing defects are all valid test objectives according to the ISTQB Foundation Level syllabus. Debugging the code is not a test objective, because debugging is the process of finding and fixing defects, which is done by developers, not testers3

A test condition is an item or event of a component or system that can be verified by one or more test cases. A test condition can be derived from various sources of information, such as requirements, specifications, design documents, use cases, user stories, etc. A test condition can also be based on various aspects of a component or system, such as functionality, usability, performance, reliability, security, etc.

The other statements are not true about test conditions because they describe different concepts related to testing. For example:

• B. The grouping of a composite set of test cases which, when tested as a whole, reveal a positive or negative result: This statement describes a test suite, which is a collection of test cases that are intended to be executed together to achieve a specific test objective or goal.
• C. A testable component derived from business requirements: This statement describes a test basis, which is the source of information or data that provides the basis for designing and executing test cases.
• D. Applies to software testing only: This statement is false because test conditions can apply to any type of testing, not just software testing. Test conditions can also be used for testing hardware, systems, processes, etc.

You can find more information about test conditions in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.1.

A consideration when deploying test execution tools is B. Recorded manual tests may become unstable in use. Test execution tools can record manual tests performed by a tester and replay them automatically on demand. However, recorded manual tests may become unstable or unreliable in use, due to various factors, such as changes in the system under test, changes in the test environment, changes in the user interface, timing issues, synchronization issues, etc. Therefore, recorded manual tests may require frequent maintenance or modification to keep them up to date and consistent with the system under test. A detailed explanation of recorded manual tests can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 112-113

Exhaustive testing is a technique that covers all possible combinations of inputs and preconditions2. However, it is not recommended to perform exhaustive testing, as it is usually impractical and impossible due to the large number of test cases required2. Instead, risk analysis and priorities should be used to focus testing efforts on the most important and critical aspects of the system under test2.

The effective ways to improve the communication and relationship between testers and others are A. a and b. Communicating factual information in a constructive way and trying to understand how the other person feels and why they react the way they do are both important skills for testers to have. Testers often have to report defects and problems that may not be well received by developers or users. Therefore, testers should communicate in a clear, objective, and respectful manner, avoiding personal attacks or blame. Testers should also empathize with the other person’s perspective and emotions, and try to resolve any conflicts or misunderstandings in a positive way. A detailed explanation of communication skills for testers can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 107-108.

• An incident report is a document that records any event occurring during testing that requires investigation1. An incident report should contain sufficient information to enable reproduction of the incident and resolution of the defect1. According to IEEE 829 Standard for Software Test Documentation, an incident report should contain the following information:

Therefore, among the options given in this question, only D provides the best detail on an incident report. It contains a clear title, a reproducibility indicator, a description that includes both expected and actual results, a reference to the specification document, and a screen shot of the failure. The other options are either missing some important information or providing inaccurate or irrelevant information

 Functional testing to test security at the system level, load testing at the system level to ensure the system availability is acceptable, regression testing at all levels, structure based testing at the component level only are the test types that will be required during the development1. A bank is developing a new service that will be delivered via the web. The user interactions are defined as a set of use cases and the service is designed to be available continuously 24/7. In view of the challenging characteristics of the service, the test manager has decided that the code should be thoroughly tested at component level. Therefore, the following test types will be required during the development:

• Functional testing to test security at the system level: This type of testing verifies that the software product performs its intended functions according to the user requirements and expectations1. Security is one of the functional aspects that needs to be tested at the system level, as it ensures that the software product protects itself from unauthorized access or harm1.
• Load testing at the system level to ensure the system availability is acceptable: This type of testing verifies that the software product can handle the expected or peak load of users or transactions without degrading its performance or functionality1. Availability is one of the quality attributes that needs to be tested at the system level, as it measures how well the software product performs its intended functions under specified conditions without interruption or failure1.
• Regression testing at all levels: This type of testing verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after changes or defect corrections1. Regression testing is required at all levels of testing, as changes or defect corrections can introduce new defects or affect existing functionality1.
• Structure based testing at the component level only: This type of testing uses the structure or logic of the source code as a test basis to derive test cases and measure test coverage1. Structure based testing is required at the component level only, as the test manager has decided that the code should be thoroughly tested at component level to ensure its quality and reliability1.

Experience-based test design techniques are techniques that use the skill, intuition, and experience of testers to derive test cases, using error guessing and exploratory testing1. Error guessing is a technique that uses common sense and previous experience to guess where defects might occur in a system1. Exploratory testing is an approach that involves simultaneous learning, test design, and test execution1. Experience-based test design techniques are typically used when there is insufficient information or time to apply other more formal techniques1. They do not use decision tables, identify the structure of the system or software, or establish traceability from test conditions back to the specifications and requirements.

The statement that best defines static techniques is D. Manual examination and automated analysis of code or project documentation. Static techniques are techniques that analyze the code or other software artifacts (such as requirements, specifications, designs, models, test cases, etc.) without executing them, and provide information about their quality, defects, complexity, maintainability, etc. Static techniques can be performed manually or automatically by using tools or methods such as reviews, inspections, walkthroughs, checklists, standards, guidelines, static analysis tools, code metrics tools, etc. Static techniques can help to improve the quality and consistency of code or other software artifacts throughout the software development life cycle and reduce the cost and effort of testing and debugging. A detailed explanation of static techniques can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 27-34.

Test cases derived from the knowledge of the testers and the knowledge of testers, developers and users are used to drive testing apply to experience-based techniques1. Experience-based techniques are techniques that use the skill, intuition, and experience of testers, developers, and users to derive test cases, using error guessing and exploratory testing1. Error guessing is a technique that uses common sense and previous experience to guess where defects might occur in a system1. Exploratory testing is an approach that involves simultaneous learning, test design, and test execution1. Experience-based techniques are typically used when there is insufficient information or time to apply other more formal techniques1. Therefore, test cases derived from the knowledge of the testers and the knowledge of testers, developers and users are used to drive testing apply to experience-based techniques.

 Integration testing is a test level that accurately defines the integration testing test level1. Integration testing is a type of testing that verifies that different components or systems work together correctly and consistently1. The test basis for integration testing includes software and system design documents that specify how the components or systems are integrated and interact with each other1. The test objects for integration testing include interfaces between components or systems that enable data exchange or communication1. The tests for integration testing concentrate on the interactions between different parts of a system and check for functional, performance, reliability, security, compatibility, and interoperability issues1. Therefore, integration testing is a test level that accurately defines the integration testing test level.

Coverage of code, schedule, estimates of defect density. Exit criteria are the conditions that must be met before testing can be completed and the system can be released. Exit criteria can be based on factors such as coverage of code or requirements, schedule or budget constraints, estimates of defect density or severity, etc. Exit criteria help to determine when to stop testing and evaluate the quality of the system. A detailed explanation of exit criteria can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 15-161.

A circumstance where maintenance testing is required is A. Migration of software onto a new platform. Migration of software onto a new platform is a type of change that affects the delivered software product and requires maintenance testing to ensure that the software product still works correctly and consistently on the new platform. A new platform can be a different hardware, operating system, network, database, browser, etc., that supports or interacts with the software product. Migration of software onto a new platform can introduce compatibility issues, performance issues, security issues, etc., that need to be detected and resolved by maintenance testing. A detailed explanation of migration testing can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], page 82.

• The question asks which of the test cases will exercise both outcomes from decision 2. Decision 2 is represented by node B in the flow graph. Node B has two outcomes: edge 2 (P > Q) and edge 3 (P <= Q). Therefore, to exercise both outcomes from decision 2, we need to choose a test case that covers both edge 2 and edge

• Among the options given in this question, only B covers both edge 2 and edge
• In B, P =36 > Q =36 for edge 2 and P =37 <= Q =35 for edge
• Therefore, B is the correct answer.

Functional and structural tests are alternative test types that may be used separately or together at B. All test levels. Functional testing is a type of testing that verifies the functionality of the system or component under test against its requirements or specifications. Functional testing focuses on what the system or component does, not how it does it. Structural testing is a type of testing that verifies the structure or code of the system or component under test. Structural testing focuses on how the system or component does it, not what it does. Functional and structural testing can be used separately or together at any test level, such as unit testing, integration testing, system testing, acceptance testing, etc. Functional and structural testing can complement each other by providing different perspectives and coverage of the system or component under test. A detailed explanation of functional and structural testing can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 25-26.

A white box testing design technique is D. Statement testing. Statement testing is a white box testing technique that is based on an analysis of the structure of the component or system. Statement testing aims to cover every executable statement in the code at least once by the test cases. Statement testing can help to detect syntax errors, logic errors, or unreachable code in the system or component under test. Statement testing is usually performed at lower levels of testing, such as unit testing or component testing. A detailed explanation of statement testing can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 68-69.

UAT stands for user acceptance testing, which is a type of testing that verifies that the software product meets the acceptance criteria and expectations of the end users or customers1. A UAT specification is a document that defines the scope, objectives, approach, and criteria for UAT1. Testers should be involved in reviewing a UAT specification at any time before UAT begins, as this can help to ensure that the UAT specification is clear, complete, consistent, testable, and aligned with the user requirements1. Testers can also provide feedback and suggestions to improve the UAT specification and avoid potential issues or conflicts during UAT execution1. Therefore, testers should be involved in reviewing a UAT specification at any time before UAT begins.

A valid reason for writing test cases based on experience and intuition is C. Tests based on experience and intuition can supplement formal techniques. Experience and intuition are valuable sources of test ideas that can help testers to identify potential risks, errors, or scenarios that may not be covered by formal techniques. Formal techniques are systematic methods that use rules or algorithms to derive test cases from the test basis (such as specifications, code, etc.). Formal techniques include black-box techniques (such as equivalence partitioning, boundary value analysis, etc.) and white-box techniques (such as statement coverage, decision coverage, etc.). Formal techniques can provide a high level of coverage and consistency, but they may not be able to capture all possible situations or behaviors of the system or component under test. Therefore, tests based on experience and intuition can supplement formal techniques by adding more diversity and creativity to the test cases. A detailed explanation of experience-based testing techniques can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 74-76.

Static code analysis is a technique that examines the source code or other software artifacts without executing them, and can detect defects, vulnerabilities, code smells, and deviations from standards early in the development process1. According to the ISTQB syllabus, one of the benefits of static testing is early defect detection2, which can reduce the cost and effort of fixing them later.

 Likelihood of failure = 10%, potential cost of impact = $500,000. The level of risk to the project can be calculated by multiplying the likelihood of failure by the potential cost of impact. This gives us the following values for each option:

A. 1% x $1m = $10,000 B. 10% x $500,000 = $50,000 C. 20% x $150,000 = $30,000 D. 5% x $500,000 = $25,000

The Cambrian Pullman Express has special ticketing requirements represented by the partial decision table below. The decision table has six columns representing six rules and eight rows representing eight conditions or actions. The table is filled with “Y” and “N” values indicating whether a particular condition is met for a particular rule.

!decision table

Carol has a student railcard and is travelling on a Flexible Standard Class ticket. James has a senior railcard and is travelling on a super saver ticket. The question asks which of the options represents the correct actions for these two test cases. To answer this question, we need to find the matching rule for each test case and then look at the corresponding actions. For Carol, the matching rule is rule 2, as she has a student railcard (Y) and a Flexible Standard Class ticket (Y). The actions for rule 2 are: OK to travel (Y), eligible to upgrade (Y), and concessionary fare (N). Therefore, Carol is OK to travel and eligible to upgrade, but not entitled to a concessionary fare. For James, the matching rule is rule 6, as he has a senior railcard (Y) and a super saver ticket (N). The actions for rule 6 are: OK to travel (N), eligible to upgrade (N), and concessionary fare (N). Therefore, James cannot use the service, is not eligible to upgrade, and is not entitled to a concessionary fare. Among the options given in this question, only A correctly represents these actions. A says that Carol is eligible to upgrade and James cannot use the service. Therefore, A is the correct answer.

An item or event that could be verified by one or more test cases. A test condition is a general term that refers to anything that can be tested by a test case, such as a requirement, a function, a feature, a use case, a user story, etc. A test condition is derived from the test basis (the source of information for testing) and serves as an input for test design and test case creation. A test condition can be expressed in natural language or in a formal notation. A detailed explanation of test condition can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 17-18.

The minimum number of test cases required to guarantee both 100% statement coverage and 100% decision coverage is 2. Statement coverage means that every statement in the code is executed at least once by the test cases. Decision coverage means that every possible outcome of each decision (such as if-else statements) is executed at least once by the test cases. To achieve both statement and decision coverage, we need to test two scenarios: one where X > Y and one where X <= Y. This will ensure that all statements and decisions are covered by the test cases. A detailed explanation of statement and decision coverage can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 61-671.

The question asks which of the test cases will ensure that the statement ‘Print ‘Hold’’ is exercised. The statement ‘Print ‘Hold’’ is executed when X > Y and Z < Y. Therefore, to exercise this statement, we need to choose a test case that satisfies these conditions. Among the options given in this question, only C satisfies these conditions. X = 42 > Y =43 and Z =42 < Y =43. Therefore, C is the correct answer.

 The other details that should be included in the incident report when it is first submitted are B. Status of the incident, degree of impact, Test Case Number. These details are important to provide information about the current state of the incident, the severity of its effect on the system or user, and the test case that detected the incident. Other details, such as suggested solution, priority, history, related defects, expected fix time, line of code, etc., can be added later during the incident management process. A detailed explanation of incident report can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 99-1001.

•  The test objectives for user acceptance testing of the first release of a new software product aimed at a general market and built using Agile methods are D. c and d. User acceptance testing is a level of testing that involves users or customers validating that the software product meets their needs and expectations before accepting it for use or deployment. User acceptance testing can have different objectives depending on the context and purpose of the software product. For a new software product aimed at a general market and built using Agile methods, some possible objectives are:

A detailed explanation of user acceptance testing can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 79-80.

The process that ensures that all items of testware are identified, version controlled, tracked for changes, so that traceability can be maintained throughout the test process is D. Configuration management process. Configuration management is a process that establishes and maintains the integrity and consistency of all items of testware throughout the test process. Configuration management involves identifying, storing, controlling, tracking, and auditing all items of testware (such as test plans, test cases, test scripts, test data, test results, etc.) and their versions and changes. Configuration management helps to ensure that only authorized and approved items of testware are used for testing and that traceability can be maintained between them. A detailed explanation of configuration management can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 101-1021.

A limitation in the use of static analysis tools is C. Static analysis tools always generate large numbers of warning messages when applied to new code, even if the code meets coding standards. Static analysis tools are tools that analyze the code or other software artifacts without executing them, and report any defects, errors, vulnerabilities, or violations of coding standards or conventions. Static analysis tools can help to improve the quality and maintainability of the code or other software artifacts. However, static analysis tools also have some limitations, such as generating large numbers of warning messages when applied to new code, even if the code meets coding standards or conventions. This can make it difficult for developers or testers to identify and prioritize the most important or critical issues to fix or address. A detailed explanation of static analysis tools can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 109-1101.

Planning and control, analysis, design, implementation, execution, evaluation of exit criteria and reporting, test closure. The fundamental test process is a generic model that describes the main activities and tasks involved in testing. The fundamental test process consists of five phases: planning and control, analysis and design, implementation and execution, evaluation of exit criteria and reporting, and test closure activities. Each phase has specific objectives, inputs, outputs, and deliverables. A detailed explanation of the fundamental test process can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 13-241.

The test organization that has the highest level of independence is C. Independent test specialists for specific test types, such as usability, performance or certification test specialists. Test independence refers to the degree of separation between the tester and the developer or user of the system or component under test. Test independence can help to reduce bias and increase objectivity in testing. Independent test specialists are testers who have specialized skills and knowledge in specific test types or domains and who are not involved in the development or use of the system or component under test. Independent test specialists can provide more reliable and accurate results than testers who are part of the development team or user community. A detailed explanation of test independence can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 9-10.

The choice of software development model depends on product and project characteristics1. A software development model is a framework that defines the activities, tasks, roles, and deliverables of a software project1. There are various software development models, such as waterfall, V-model, iterative, incremental, agile, etc1. The choice of software development model depends on product and project characteristics, such as size, complexity, scope, requirements, quality attributes, risks, resources, schedule, budget, etc1. Different software development models have different advantages and disadvantages for different types of products and projects1. Therefore, the choice of software development model depends on product and project characteristics.

Independent testing is important because C. Independent testers can verify assumptions made during specification and implementation of the system. Independent testing refers to testing performed by testers who are not involved in the development or use of the system or component under test. Independent testers can provide an unbiased and objective view of the quality of the system or component under test. Independent testers can also verify assumptions made by developers or users during specification and implementation of the system or component under test. Assumptions are statements that are believed to be true without proof or verification. Assumptions can lead to errors or defects if they are incorrect or inconsistent with reality. Independent testers can help to identify and validate assumptions by using different sources of information, such as requirements, specifications, standards, regulations, etc., and by applying different testing techniques, such as black-box techniques, white-box techniques, etc. A detailed explanation of independent testing can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 9-10.

Screen-dialog flows are sequences of screens and dialogs that represent the user interface and interaction of a system. Use case testing is a technique that uses use cases as a test basis to derive test cases1. A use case is a description of interactions between actors and a system to achieve a goal1. Use case testing is the most effective technique in testing screen-dialog flows, as it can capture the user requirements, scenarios, and expected outcomes of the system. Boundary value testing is a technique that uses boundary values as a test basis to derive test cases1. A boundary value is an input value or output value on the edge of an equivalence partition or at the smallest or largest value of a range1. Boundary value testing is not the most effective technique in testing screen-dialog flows, as it is more suitable for testing numerical inputs and outputs. Statement testing and coverage is a technique that uses statements in the source code as a test basis to measure the coverage achieved by a test suite1. A statement is a minimal executable unit of source code1. Statement testing and coverage is not the most effective technique in testing screen-dialog flows, as it is more suitable for testing the internal logic and structure of the code. State transition testing is a technique that uses state transition diagrams as a test basis to derive test cases1. A state transition diagram shows the states of a system and the transitions between them triggered by events or conditions1. State transition testing is not the most effective technique in testing screen-dialog flows, as it is more suitable for testing systems that have complex or dynamic behavior based on different states.

Risk-based testing is an approach to testing that prioritizes and focuses on testing activities based on the level of risk associated with each feature or function of the system under test. Risk-based testing aims to optimize the use of time, resources, and techniques for testing by identifying and addressing the most critical and likely sources of failure or harm in the system under test. Some examples of typical risk-based testing activities are:

• Brainstorming sessions are held with a wide variety of stakeholders to identify possible failures in the system: This activity is part of the risk identification process, which involves gathering information and opinions from different perspectives and sources to discover potential risks in the system under test.
• Tests are prioritized to ensure that those associated with critical parts of the system are executed earlier: This activity is part of the risk analysis and evaluation process, which involves assessing the probability and impact of each risk and ranking them according to their severity and importance.
• The focus of testing is shifted to an area in the system where tests find more defects than expected: This activity is part of the risk mitigation and monitoring process, which involves taking actions to reduce or eliminate the risks and tracking their status and progress.

The evaluation of a risk-management tool to decide which tool to use for future projects is not an example of a typical risk-based testing activity because it is not directly related to testing the system under test based on its risks. Rather, it is an example of a tool selection or evaluation activity, which involves comparing and choosing a tool that can support or enhance the testing process based on criteria such as functionality, usability, reliability, compatibility, cost, etc. You can find more information about risk-based testing in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 3, Section 3.4.

Memory leaks are errors that occur when a program does not release memory that it has allocated, causing the system to run out of memory and slow down or crash. Memory leaks cannot be detected by structure-based testing techniques, which are based on the code structure and logic. Structure-based testing techniques can only find errors that are related to the control flow, data flow, or logic of the program. For example, they can find errors such as features that are only partially implemented, data structures that are used before initialization, or division by zero. To detect memory leaks, you need dynamic analysis tools that monitor the memory usage of the program during execution. You can find more information about structure-based testing techniques and dynamic analysis tools in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 4, Sections 4.2 and 4.31.

Regression testing is a type of testing that is performed after a software system has been changed or modified to verify that the changes have not introduced any new defects or adversely affected the existing functionality of the system. Regression testing can be performed when the software system undergoes different types of changes, such as:

• Corrective changes: Changes that fix defects or errors in the software system
• Adaptive changes: Changes that adapt the software system to new platforms or environments
• Perfective changes: Changes that improve the performance or usability of the software system
• Preventive changes: Changes that avoid potential problems or issues in the software system

In this case, the software system was re-deployed because the backend database was changed from one vendor to another, which is an example of an adaptive change. Therefore, the test manager decided to perform some functional tests on the re-deployed system to ensure that the change did not affect the functionality of the system. This is an example of regression testing.

The other types of testing mentioned in the question are not relevant for this scenario. For example:

• Non-functional testing: This type of testing verifies the non-functional aspects of the software system, such as reliability, performance, security, usability, etc.
• Structural testing: This type of testing verifies the internal structure or implementation of the software system, such as code, architecture, design, etc.
• Unit testing: This type of testing verifies individual components or units of software in isolation from other components or systems.

You can find more information about regression testing in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 2, Section 2.4.

A use case is a description of how a user interacts with a system to achieve a goal or perform a task. A use case typically consists of a sequence of steps or actions that the user and the system perform to complete the goal or task. A use case can be used as a basis for designing test cases that verify the functionality and usability of the system under test. A test sequence that represents a possible use case should follow the logical order and flow of the user-system interaction and cover the main scenario and possible variations or exceptions. For example, based on the test cases given for a Library Management System, we can identify the following use cases:

• UC1: Add a new borrower to the system
• UC2: Update a borrower’s data
• UC3: Remove a borrower from the system
• UC4: Loan a book to a borrower
• UC5: Return a book from a borrower
• UC6: Reserve a book for a borrower
• UC7: Send “reservation ready” message to a borrower

The test sequence that represents a possible use case is D. 1-2-6-7-4-5-3. This test sequence follows the logical order and flow of the user-system interaction and covers the main scenario and possible variations or exceptions. For example:

• TC1: Add a new borrower to the system -> This is the first step of the use case, where the user registers as a new borrower in the system.
• TC2: Update a borrower’s data -> This is a possible variation of the use case, where the user updates their personal or contact information in the system.
• TC6: Reserve a book for a borrower -> This is the second step of the use case, where the user reserves a book that they want to borrow from the library.
• TC7: Send “reservation ready” message to a borrower -> This is the third step of the use case, where the system sends a message to the user informing them that their reserved book is ready for pickup.
• TC4: Loan a book to a borrower -> This is the fourth step of the use case, where the user picks up their reserved book from the library and loans it from the system.
• TC5: Return a book from a borrower -> This is the fifth step of the use case, where the user returns their borrowed book to the library and returns it to the system.
• TC3: Remove a borrower from the system -> This is a possible exception of the use case, where

the user decides to cancel their membership and remove their account from the system.

The other test sequences do not represent possible use cases because they do not follow the logical order and flow of the user-system interaction or they do not cover the main scenario and possible variations or exceptions. For example:

• A. 1-4-2-7-5-6-3 -> This test sequence does not follow the logical order and flow of the user-system interaction because it performs some steps before or after they are supposed to happen. For example, it performs TC4 (Loan a book to a borrower) before TC6 (Reserve a book for a borrower), which does not make sense because the user cannot loan a book that they have not reserved yet.
• B. 1-6-2-5-7-4-3 -> This test sequence does not follow the logical order and flow of the user-system interaction because it performs some steps before or after they are supposed to happen. For example, it performs TC5 (Return a book from a borrower) before TC4 (Loan a book to a borrower), which does not make sense because the user cannot return a book that they have not loaned yet.
• C. 1-6-4-7-5-3-2 -> This test sequence does not cover the main scenario and possible variations or exceptions because it omits some steps that are essential for completing or terminating the use case. For example, it omits TC2 (Update a borrower’s data), which is a possible variation of the use case that allows the user to change their personal or contact information in the system.

You can find more information about use cases and test sequences in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.2.

Use case testing is a specification-based test technique that is based on the use cases or scenarios that describe how users interact with the system under test. Use case testing aims to find defects in the process flow or functionality of the system under test by verifying that it behaves as expected according to the use cases or scenarios. Use case testing does not require any knowledge of the data flow or structure of the system under test; it only focuses on what the system does rather than how it does it. Use case testing can be done by professional testers or real users, depending on the level and purpose of testing. Use case testing can also be designed by customers or end users, developers, testers, analysts, or anyone who has access to the use case specifications or user requirements. You can find more information about use case testing in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.2.

The Test Analysis and Design activity of the test process is the activity where test conditions and test cases are identified and specified based on the test objectives and criteria. The Test Analysis and Design activity also involves identifying and preparing the necessary test data and test environment to support the test execution. Some of the tasks of the Test Analysis and Design activity are:

• Reviewing the test basis: This task involves reviewing the requirements, specifications, design documents, or other sources of information that form the basis for testing.
• Identifying test conditions: This task involves identifying what needs to be tested based on the test basis and objectives.
• Designing and prioritizing test cases: This task involves designing specific scenarios or steps to verify each test condition and assigning priorities to them based on their importance or risk level.
• Identifying necessary test data to support the test conditions and test cases: This task involves identifying what data is needed to execute each test case and how to obtain or generate it.
• Identifying and preparing the test environment: This task involves identifying what hardware, software, network, data, tools, etc., are needed to execute the test cases and how to set up and maintain them.

Measuring the percentage of prepared test cases with what was actually prepared is not a task of the Test Analysis and Design activity because it does not involve identifying or specifying anything related to testing. Rather, it is a task of the Test Monitoring and Control activity, which involves measuring and reporting the progress and status of testing against the planned activities and criteria. You can find more information about the Test Analysis and Design activity in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 31.

The requirement given in the image specifies an additional fee of $3 that is charged during the weekend, with some exceptions and discounts based on the age of the visitors. To test this requirement, we can use boundary value analysis, which is a specification-based test technique that involves testing the values at or near the boundaries of an equivalence partition. An equivalence partition is a set of values that are expected to be treated in the same way by the system under test. For example, based on the requirement, we can identify the following equivalence partitions for the input age:

• EP1: Age < 0 (invalid)
• EP2: Age = 0 (valid, no charge)
• EP3: 0 < Age < 7 (valid, no charge)
• EP4: Age = 7 (valid, 20% discount)
• EP5: 7 < Age < 13 (valid, 20% discount)
• EP6: Age = 13 (valid, 20% discount)
• EP7: 13 < Age < 65 (valid, full charge)
• EP8: Age = 65 (valid, 50% discount)
• EP9: Age > 65 (valid, 50% discount)

The boundary values for each equivalence partition are the values at or near the edges of the partition. For example, the boundary values for EP3 are 1 and 6. The boundary values for EP4 are 6 and 7. The boundary values for EP5 are 7 and 12. And so on.

To test this requirement using boundary value analysis, we need to select one value from each boundary and test it with different combinations of weekend and weekday. For example, we can select the following values:

• BV1: Age = -1 (from EP1)
• BV2: Age = 0 (from EP2 and EP3)
• BV3: Age = 6 (from EP3 and EP4)
• BV4: Age = 7 (from EP4 and EP5)
• BV5: Age = 12 (from EP5 and EP6)
• BV6: Age = 13 (from EP6 and EP7)
• BV7: Age = 64 (from EP7 and EP8)
• BV8: Age = 65 (from EP8 and EP9)
• BV9: Age = 66 (from EP9)

We can then create test cases using these values and different combinations of weekend and weekday. For example:

• TC1: Age = -1, Weekend = Yes -> Invalid input
• TC2: Age = -1, Weekend = No -> Invalid input
• TC3: Age = 0, Weekend = Yes -> No charge
• TC4: Age = 0, Weekend = No -> No charge
• TC5: Age = 6, Weekend = Yes -> No charge
• TC6: Age = 6, Weekend = No -> No charge
• TC7: Age = 7, Weekend = Yes -> $2.40 ($3 - 20% discount)
• TC8: Age = 7, Weekend = No -> No charge
• TC9: Age = 12, Weekend = Yes -> $2.40 ($3 - 20% discount)
• TC10: Age = 12, Weekend = No -> No charge
• TC11: Age = 13, Weekend = Yes -> $2.40 ($3 - 20% discount)
• TC12: Age = 13, Weekend = No -> No charge
• TC13: Age = 64, Weekend = Yes -> $3
• TC14: Age = 64, Weekend = No -> No charge
• TC15: Age = 65, Weekend = Yes -> $1.50 ($3 - 50% discount)
• TC16: Age = 65, Weekend = No -> No charge
• TC17: Age = 66, Weekend = Yes -> $1.50 ($3 - 50% discount)
• TC18: Age =

66, Weekend = No -> No charge

Therefore, we need a minimum of 18 valid test cases to achieve 100% boundary value coverage based on input age.

$3.01 is not a valid output boundary value because it is not a possible output value based on the requirement. The output values can only be $0, $1.50, $2.40, or $3 depending on the input age and weekend status.

You can find more information about boundary value analysis in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.2.

The extent of testing required for a software product or feature depends on several factors that influence the level of quality and risk involved in delivering or deploying it. Some of these factors are:

• Budget to do testing: This factor indicates how much money is available or allocated for conducting the test activities, which affects the scope, depth, duration, and resources of testing.
• Time available to do testing: This factor indicates how much time is available or allocated for conducting the test activities, which affects the schedule, frequency, speed, and coverage of testing.
• Level of risk of the product or feature: This factor indicates how much impact or harm a failure or defect in the product or feature can cause to the users, customers, stakeholders, or environment, which affects the priority, intensity, complexity, and rigor of testing.
• Complexity of the product or feature: This factor indicates how difficult or challenging it is to understand, design, implement, or maintain the product or feature, which affects the effort, skill, technique, and tool required for testing.

A particular tester involved in testing is not a deciding factor in determining the extent of testing required because it does not affect the quality or risk level of the product or feature being tested. Rather, it is an outcome or consequence of deciding how much testing is needed based on other factors such as budget, time, risk, and complexity. You can find more information about determining the extent of testing in Software Testing Foundations: A Study Guide for the Certified Tester Exam, Chapter 2, Section 2.12.

Testing tools can be used by both developers and testers for different purposes and at different stages of the software development life cycle. For example, developers can use tools such as unit testing frameworks, code coverage tools, debugging tools, static analysis tools, etc., to improve the quality of their code and find defects early. Testers can use tools such as test management tools, test design tools, test execution tools, test data preparation tools, performance testing tools, etc., to support their testing activities and increase their efficiency and effectiveness. The use of testing tools does not necessarily imply test automation, which is the use of software to perform or support test activities that would otherwise require manual intervention. Test automation is a complex and costly process that requires careful planning, design, implementation, maintenance, and evaluation. The use of testing tools also does not change the role of the test team, which is still responsible for defining the test strategy, designing the test cases, analyzing the test results, reporting the defects, etc. You can find more information about testing tools and test automation in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 61.

The most important report improvement is A. Add an impact analysis. An impact analysis is an assessment of how the defect affects the functionality, usability, performance, reliability, security, or other aspects of the system under test. An impact analysis can help prioritize and classify the defect based on its severity and urgency. An impact analysis can also help determine the root cause and possible solutions for the defect. An impact analysis is an essential part of a defect report because it provides useful information for decision-making and improvement processes.

The other report improvements are not as important as adding an impact analysis because they do not provide as much information or value for decision-making and improvement processes. For example:

• B. Add information about which developer should fix the bug: This report improvement is not necessary because it is not part of the information that is required to describe, reproduce, and prioritize the defect. The assignment of developers to fix bugs is part of the defect management process, which involves assigning, tracking, resolving, and verifying defects.
• C. Add the time stamp when the incident happened: This report improvement is not very useful because it does not provide much information about the cause or effect of the defect. The time stamp when the incident happened is only relevant if it is related to some external factors or events that could influence the behavior or performance of the system under test.
• D. Add information about which web browser was used: This report improvement is not very relevant because it does not affect the functionality or usability of the system under test. The web browser used is only relevant if it is related to some compatibility or interoperability issues that could cause defects or failures in the system under test.

You can find more information about defect reports and impact analysis in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 5.

The diagram lists various types of operating systems (LNX, W2K, WSP), databases (ORA, MSQ, SQL), and application servers (JBS, WSP) supported by the application under test. To test all possible combinations of these types, we need to multiply the number of options in each category. In this case, we have:

• 3 options for operating systems
• 3 options for databases
• 2 options for application servers

Therefore, we have 3 x 3 x 2 = 18 possible combinations to test.

However, if we look closely at the diagram, we can see that some combinations are not valid or feasible because they are not connected by lines. For example, we cannot test LNX with WSP as an application server because there is no line between them. Similarly, we cannot test W2K with JBS as an application server because there is no line between them. Therefore, we need to exclude these invalid combinations from our calculation.

If we count only the valid combinations that are connected by lines in the diagram, we get:

• 5 combinations for LNX (LNX-ORA-JBS, LNX-ORA-WSP, LNX-MSQ-JBS, LNX-MSQ-WSP, LNX-SQL-JBS)
• 5 combinations for W2K (W2K-ORA-WSP, W2K-MSQ-WSP, W2K-SQL-WSP)
• 5 combinations for WSP (WSP-ORA-JBS, WSP-ORA-WSP, WSP-MSQ-JBS, WSP-MSQ-WSP)

Therefore, we have 5 + 5 + 5 = 15 valid combinations to test.

You can find more information about testing combinations in Software Testing Foundations: A Study Guide for the Certified Tester Exam, Chapter 4, Section 4.22.

The fundamental test process activity where the sufficiency of testing and resulting information are assessed is Evaluating exit criteria and reporting. This activity involves checking whether the test objectives have been met and whether there are any unresolved issues or risks that could affect the release or deployment decision. This activity also involves preparing and communicating a test summary report that summarizes the test activities and results and provides recommendations and feedback for improvement. You can find more information about Evaluating exit criteria and reporting in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 3, Section 3.5.

The statement that does not describe how testing contributes to higher quality is “The testing of software demonstrates the absence of defects”. This statement is false because testing cannot prove that a software system is defect-free or has a certain level of quality because there might be some untested inputs or outputs that could reveal defects or failures. Testing can only provide information about the quality and risk level of a software system based on the observed behavior and results under certain conditions and assumptions. The other statements describe how testing contributes to higher quality by:

• Performing a review of the requirement specifications before implementing the system can enhance quality: This statement is true because reviewing the requirement specifications can help identify and prevent defects, ambiguities, inconsistencies, or incompleteness in the requirements before they are implemented in the system, which can save time and effort and improve customer satisfaction.
• Properly designed tests that pass reduce the level of risk in a system: This statement is true because passing tests can increase confidence that the system meets its requirements and expectations and provides value to the users and customers. Passing tests can also reduce the probability or impact of failures or defects in the system that could cause harm or loss.
• Software testing identifies defects, which can be used to improve development activities: This statement is true because identifying defects can help analyze and remove their causes and prevent them from recurring in future development activities. Identifying defects can also help improve development processes, methods, standards, tools, techniques, etc., by providing feedback and lessons learned.

You can find more information about how testing contributes to higher quality in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 1.

The ‘Standard for Software Test Documentation’ specification (IEEE 829) is a standard that defines a set of documents that can be used to document the test process and its outcomes. The standard provides an outline for each document, specifying its purpose, content, and format. However, the standard does not prescribe how to apply it in different contexts or projects. It is up to each organization or project to decide how to adapt the standard to their specific needs and situation. Therefore, the standard is not a rigid or mandatory requirement that must be followed strictly by all testers. Rather, it is a flexible and adaptable guideline that can be used as a reference or a starting point for creating test documentation regimes. You can find more information about IEEE 829 and test documentation in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 51.

Functional testing is an example of black-box dynamic testing. Functional testing is the process of testing the functionality or behavior of a software system based on its requirements or specifications. Functional testing does not require any knowledge of the internal structure or implementation of the system under test; it only focuses on what the system does rather than how it does it. Functional testing is also an example of dynamic testing because it involves executing the software system with selected inputs and observing its outputs and effects on the environment. Dynamic testing is different from static testing, which involves examining the software system without executing it, such as code inspection, static analysis, etc. You can find more information about functional testing and dynamic testing in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 21.

 System integration testing and acceptance testing are two different levels of testing that have different objectives and stakeholders. System integration testing is the process of testing the interactions and interfaces between different components or systems that form a larger system. System integration testing verifies that the system meets its functional and non-functional requirements and works as expected in its intended environment. System integration testing is usually done by testers or developers who have access to the system architecture and design specifications. Acceptance testing is the process of testing the system by the end users or customers to determine if it satisfies their needs and expectations and is ready for deployment or delivery. Acceptance testing verifies that the system complies with the user requirements and business processes and provides value to the stakeholders. Acceptance testing is usually done by users or customers who have access to the user requirements and business scenarios. You can find more information about system integration testing and acceptance testing in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 2, Sections 2.2 and 2.31.

A configuration management tool is a tool that allows users to manage and control the versions and changes of software artifacts, such as code, documents, test cases, etc. A configuration management tool can help prevent the loss of Sam’s updates by:

• Providing a centralized repository where Sam can store and retrieve his test cases and other artifacts
• Keeping track of the history and status of each artifact and allowing Sam to compare and revert to previous versions if needed
• Supporting collaboration and communication among team members by allowing them to share and access the latest versions of the artifacts

The other tools mentioned in the question are not relevant for this scenario because they do not provide the same functionality or benefits as a configuration management tool. For example:

• A. Incident management tool: This tool type allows users to record, track, manage, and report the defects found during testing. It does not help with managing or controlling the versions or changes of test cases or other artifacts.
• C. Test execution tool: This tool type allows users to execute test cases automatically or semi-automatically and compare the actual results with the expected results. It does not help with managing or controlling the versions or changes of test cases or other artifacts.
• D. Backup tool: This tool type allows users to create copies of data or files and store them in a different location or device for recovery purposes. It does not help with managing or controlling the versions or changes of test cases or other artifacts.

You can find more information about configuration management tools in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 6, Section 6.4.

Component testing is a part of the V-Model, which is a development life cycle model that shows the relationship between each phase of development and its corresponding phase of testing. In this model, each level of testing (unit testing, integration testing, system testing, acceptance testing) has a corresponding level of development (component design, component integration, system design, requirements analysis). Component testing is the process of testing individual components or units of software in isolation from other components or systems. Component testing verifies that the components meet their functional and non-functional requirements and work as expected in their intended environment. Component testing is usually done by developers who have access to the component design and code specifications. You can find more information about component testing and the V-Model in Software Testing Foundations: A Study Guide for the Certified Tester Exam, Chapter 22.

Confirmation testing, also known as re-testing, is the process of testing a defect that has been fixed to verify that it has been resolved and does not affect other parts of the system. Confirmation testing is usually done by the same tester who reported the defect and using the same test case that revealed the defect. You can find more information about confirmation testing in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 3, Section 3.21.

The term ‘Pesticide paradox’ refers to the phenomenon where the effectiveness of test cases that are repeated and focused on the same scenarios decreases over time because they tend to find the same defects or no defects at all. This is because the system under test becomes more resistant or immune to the existing test cases, just like pests become more resistant or immune to pesticides over time. To overcome the pesticide paradox, test cases should be regularly reviewed and updated to cover new or changed requirements, scenarios, risks, or defects. Test cases should also be designed to cover different aspects and perspectives of the system under test, such as functionality, usability, performance, security, etc. You can find more information about the pesticide paradox in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 4, Section 4.11.

Multiple condition coverage is a structure-based test technique that aims to achieve a high level of coverage by testing all possible combinations of conditions and outcomes in each decision point of the code or design of the system under test. Multiple condition coverage verifies that each condition in a decision point has an effect on the outcome and that there are no hidden defects or logical errors in the code or design. Multiple condition coverage requires some knowledge of the internal structure or implementation of the system under test; it focuses on how the system does what it does rather than what it does. Multiple condition coverage is one of the most rigorous and complex structure-based test techniques because it can generate a large number of test cases for each decision point, especially if there are many conditions involved. You can find more information about multiple condition coverage in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.3.

The requirement given in

the image specifies

the charge for

a money transfer based on

the amount

of money transferred.

The amount can be anywhere from 1 to 5000 euros, with different charges applied for different ranges of amounts.

To test this requirement, we can use equivalence partitioning, which is a specification-based test technique that involves dividing the input or output values into groups or partitions that are expected to be treated in the same way by the system under test. For example, based on the requirement, we can identify the following equivalence partitions for the input amount:

• EP1: Amount < 1 (invalid)
• EP2: 1 <= Amount <= 1999 (valid, charge = 10 euros)
• EP3: 2000 <= Amount <= 5000 (valid, charge = 15 euros)
• EP4: Amount > 5000 (invalid)

The set of amounts that covers all equivalence partitions is C. 0-100-2000-6000. This set of amounts includes one value from each equivalence partition and ensures that all possible scenarios are tested. For example:

• TC1: Amount = 0 -> Invalid input
• TC2: Amount = 100 -> Valid input, charge = 10 euros
• TC3: Amount = 2000 -> Valid input, charge = 15 euros
• TC4: Amount = 6000 -> Invalid input

The other sets of amounts do not cover all equivalence partitions because they either include values that belong to the same partition or exclude values that belong to different partitions. For example:

• A. 0-1999-2000-5000 -> This set of amounts does not cover all equivalence partitions because it includes two values that belong to EP2 (1999 and 2000) and excludes any value that belongs to EP3.
• B. 1-2000-5001-10000 -> This set of amounts does not cover all equivalence partitions because it includes two values that belong to EP4 (5001 and 10000) and excludes any value that belongs to EP2.
• D. 99-1-2000-4999.99 -> This set of amounts does not cover all equivalence partitions because it includes a value that is not an integer (4999.99), which violates the assumption that only integer values can occur.

You can find more information about equivalence partitioning in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.2.

Test estimation is the process of predicting the effort, time, and resources required for testing a software system. Test estimation depends on several factors that influence the scope, complexity, and quality of testing. Some of these factors are:

• Characteristics of the product: This factor indicates how difficult or challenging it is to test the software system based on its size, functionality, reliability, usability, performance, security, etc.
• Characteristics of the development process: This factor indicates how well or poorly the software system is developed based on the development methodology, standards, tools, techniques, etc.
• Characteristics of the test process: This factor indicates how effective or efficient the testing process is based on the test strategy, plan, design, execution, evaluation, etc.
• Characteristics of the test team: This factor indicates how skilled or experienced the test team is based on their knowledge, competence, motivation, communication, collaboration, etc.

The outcome of testing of previous test cycle is not a factor on which test estimation is dependent upon because it does not affect the effort, time, or resources required for testing the current test cycle. Rather, it is an outcome or consequence of test estimation that can provide feedback and lessons learned for improving future test estimations. You can find more information about test estimation in Software Testing Foundations: A Study Guide for the Certified Tester Exam, Chapter 22.

How to fix the defect is not needed to specify in a defect report because it is not part of the information that is required to describe, reproduce, and prioritize the defect. How to fix the defect is part of the solution or resolution that is provided by the developers or maintainers who are responsible for correcting the defect. A defect report is a document that records and communicates the details of a defect found during testing. A defect report typically includes the following information:

• Defect ID: A unique identifier for the defect
• Summary: A brief description of the defect
• Severity and priority: An indication of how serious and urgent the defect is
• Test environment details: A description of the hardware, software, network, data, tools, etc., that were used when the defect was found
• How to reproduce the defect: A step-by-step procedure to recreate the defect
• Expected and actual results: A comparison of what should have happened and what actually happened when the defect occurred
• Attachments: Any additional information or evidence that can help understand or resolve the defect, such as screenshots, logs, files, etc.

You can find more information about defect reports in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 5.

A software company decided to buy a commercial application for its accounting operations. As part of the evaluation process, the company decided to assemble a team to test a number of candidate applications. The most suitable team for this goal would be a team with a mix of software testers and experts from the accounting department. This team would have the following advantages:

• Software testers have the skills and experience to design, execute, and evaluate test cases based on the requirements and criteria of the company. They can also use tools and techniques to support their testing activities and provide reliable and objective information about the quality and risk level of each candidate application.
• Experts from the accounting department have the knowledge and expertise to understand and validate the functionality and usability of each candidate application. They can also provide feedback and suggestions for improvement based on their needs and expectations as end users or customers.

The other teams mentioned in the question are not as suitable for this goal as they are for other purposes or scenarios. For example:

• A team from an outsourcing company which specializes in testing accounting software: This team might have the skills and experience to test accounting software, but they might not have the knowledge and expertise to understand and validate the specific requirements and criteria of the company that wants to buy the application. They might also lack the communication and collaboration with the stakeholders of the company who are involved in the evaluation process.
• A team of users from the accounting department that will need to use the application on a daily basis: This team might have the knowledge and expertise to understand and validate the functionality and usability of each candidate application, but they might not have the skills and experience to design, execute, and evaluate test cases based on the requirements and criteria of the company. They might also lack the tools and techniques to support their testing activities and provide reliable and objective information about the quality and risk level of each candidate application.
• A team from the company’s testing team, due to their experience in testing software: This team might have the skills and experience to design, execute, and evaluate test cases based on the requirements and criteria of the company, but they might not have the knowledge and expertise to understand and validate the functionality and usability of each candidate application. They might also lack the feedback and suggestions for improvement based on the needs and expectations of the end users or customers.

To achieve 100% statement coverage, you need to execute every statement in the code at least once. In this case, you need two test cases: one where condition A is true and one where condition A is false. This way, you can cover both the DO B statement and the END IF statement. You can find more information about statement coverage in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 4, Section 4.31.

Maintenance testing is a type of testing that is performed after a software product has been delivered and deployed to ensure that it still meets its requirements and functions correctly after changes have been made to it or to its environment. Changes can include corrective changes (fixing defects), adaptive changes (adapting to new platforms or environments), perfective changes (improving performance or usability), or preventive changes (avoiding potential problems). One of the appropriate reasons for maintenance testing is to verify that the software product works as expected after upgrading the operating system, which is an example of an adaptive change. Other reasons for maintenance testing can include verifying that the software product works as expected after fixing defects, adding new features, improving performance, or preventing future issues. You can find more information about maintenance testing in Software Testing Foundations: A Study Guide for the Certified Tester Exam, Chapter 12.

According to the syllabus, root cause analysis is a technique that aims to identify and address the underlying causes of defects or problems in a process or system. Root cause analysis involves finding the effect (the observable symptom or outcome of the problem), finding the cause (the factor or factors that directly influence the effect), and finding the root cause (the fundamental reason why the cause exists). The answer C is correct because it most accurately reflects this scenario. The incorrect customer discount is the effect and the reason for the requirement error is the root cause. The other answers are incorrect because they either confuse the effect, cause, and root cause or use incorrect terms.

References: [Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus], Section 5.2.1, page 58.

The statement that use cases are normally derived from decision tables is not true. Decision tables are a technique to represent complex logical conditions in a tabular form, where each column represents a possible combination of conditions and actions. Use cases are a technique to describe how a system interacts with one or more actors (users or other systems) to achieve a specific goal. Use cases are not derived from decision tables, but from the requirements and the user’s perspective of the system.

References: [Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus], Section 4.5.2 and 4.3.2

Maintenance testing is triggered by changes, such as migration, retirement, or enhancement of a system1. Therefore, option A is the best example of a trigger for maintenance testing. Options B, C, and D are examples of triggers for development testing, not maintenance testing1. References: 1, Section 2.3.2

The correct answer is D, as it describes a task that is most likely to be performed by the tester. A tester is a person who performs testing activities such as planning, designing, executing, and evaluating tests2. Creating the detailed test execution schedule is one of these activities, as it involves defining the order and timing of test cases to be executed based on various factors such as dependencies, risks, priorities, and resources2. Option A is incorrect, as it describes a task that is most likely to be performed by the test manager. A test manager is a person who leads and manages testing activities such as establishing test policies and strategies, managing test teams and stakeholders, monitoring and controlling test progress and quality, and reporting on test results2. Developing a test strategy and test policy for the organization is one of these activities, as it involves defining the overall approach and objectives for testing at an organizational level2. Option B is incorrect, as it describes a task that is most likely to be performed by the test analyst. A test analyst is a person who supports testing activities such as analyzing requirements and risks, designing and prioritizing tests, evaluating test coverage and traceability, and reviewing work products2. Introducing suitable metrics for measuring test progress is one of these activities, as it involves defining and collecting quantitative data to monitor and control various aspects of testing such as efficiency, effectiveness, quality, and maturity2. Option C is incorrect, as it describes a task that is most likely to be performed by the test leader. A test leader is a person who coordinates testing activities such as planning and estimating tests, allocating tasks and resources, supervising test execution and evaluation, communicating with stakeholders, and resolving issues2. Promoting and advocating the test team within the organization is one of these activities, as it involves demonstrating the value and benefits of testing to other parties such as management, developers, customers, and users2. References: 2, Section 2.3

Component testing is concerned with testing the smallest bodies of software, such as functions, classes, procedures, or modules. Component testing is also known as unit testing or module testing. Feature testing is a type of functional testing that focuses on verifying a specific feature or functionality of a system. Functional testing is a type of black-box testing that verifies that the system meets its functional requirements and specifications. Subsystem testing is a type of integration testing that verifies that a group of components work together as expected. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Section 2.2

The ideal number of regression test cycles is as many as time and budget allow, because regression testing is done to ensure that no new defects have been introduced by changes or fixes in the software, and that all previously fixed defects are still fixed. Therefore, more regression test cycles can increase the confidence in the software quality and reliability.

The main reason for using a pilot project to introduce a testing tool into an organization is C. To assess whether the tool will be cost-effective. A pilot project is a small-scale trial or experiment that is used to evaluate the feasibility, benefits, risks, and challenges of introducing a testing tool into an organization. A pilot project can help to assess whether the tool will be cost-effective, by comparing the costs of acquiring, deploying, using, and maintaining the tool with the benefits of using the tool, such as increased efficiency, effectiveness, quality, etc. A pilot project can also help to identify any technical, organizational, or human factors that may affect the successful adoption of the tool, and plan for any necessary actions or changes to address them. A detailed explanation of pilot projects can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 115-1161.

 Equivalence partitioning is a technique that divides the input domain of a system into partitions or classes that are expected to behave similarly or produce similar outputs2. A test case can cover one value from each partition, as it is assumed that all values in the same partition are equivalent for testing purposes2. In this question, the groups of numbers fall into different equivalence classes based on the amount of customs duty to be paid, as shown below:

Group

Equivalence Classes

$20,000 $20,001 $30,001

No duty (up to $2,000), 10% duty ($2,001-$10,000), 12% duty ($10,001-$30,000), 17% duty (above $30,000)

$2,000 $2,001 $10,000

No duty (up to $2,000), 10% duty ($2,001-$10,000), 12% duty ($10,001-$30,000)

$2,000 $8,000 $20,000

No duty (up to $2,000), 10% duty ($2,001-$10,000), 12% duty ($10,001-$30,000)

$1,500 $2,000 $10,000

No duty (up to $2,000), 10% duty ($2,001-$10,000)