ISTQB-CTFL ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL v4.0) Questions and Answers

All testing levels are applicable, independent of which software development life-cycle process (V-model, iterative, incremental) is used. Testing levels are defined based on the scope and objectives of testing, not on the software development model. Component testing, integration testing, system testing and acceptance testing are common testing levels that can be applied to any software development model, as long as they are planned and executed properly. The V-model is a software development model that emphasizes the relationship between each development phase and its corresponding testing phase. Iterative and incremental models are software development models that divide the development process into smaller cycles or iterations, where each iteration produces a working version of the software that can be tested and evaluated. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 18.

Acceptance Test-Driven Development (ATDD) tests focus on verifying whether the system meets the specified acceptance criteria. The most critical path to test first would be the scenario where everything is done correctly (happy path), ensuring the basic functionality works as expected.

The new user provides all valid data.

This ensures the registration form works and the user receives a confirmation email.

This test covers the basic functionality and will help verify that the primary use case is handled correctly before testing invalid or edge cases.

A failure is an event in which a component or system does not perform a required function within specified limits. A failure is observable by the software users or other stakeholders. A failure is caused by one or more defects in the software. In this case, the software not being able to meet the desired response time is an example of a failure, as it deviates from the stated requirement and affects the user experience. It is not a defect, which is a flaw in the software that causes the failure. It is not an error, which is a human action that produces an incorrect result. It is not a non-defect, as it clearly violates a specified requirement. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 1, page 4.

In the given code snippet, the premium is increased by 1500 if the age is less than 30. Therefore, at the boundary value of age 29, the premium should be 2500 + 1500 = 4000, and at age 30, the premium should remain at its initial value of 2500, as the condition is no longer met. Option B correctly reflects this with 29, 4000 and 30, 2500 as the boundary value and the expected results, respectively.

When writing a defect report, the tester can specify the expected result and the actual result based on the observation. The expected result is what the requirements specify, and the actual result is what was observed during testing. These elements are crucial for clearly communicating the nature of the defect to developers and other stakeholders. The other items such as test environment, test level, and root cause may not be clear or necessary at this stage of defect reporting.

Project risks are the uncertainties or threats that may affect the project objectives, such as scope, schedule, cost, and quality. According to the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, some of the factors that contribute to project risks are:

Skill and staff shortages: This factor refers to the lack of adequate or qualified human resources to perform the project tasks. This may result in delays, errors, rework, or low productivity.

Problems in defining the right requirements: This factor refers to the difficulties or ambiguities in eliciting, analyzing, specifying, validating, or managing the requirements of the project. This may result in misalignment, inconsistencies, gaps, or changes in the requirements, affecting the project scope and quality.

Contractual issues: This factor refers to the challenges or disputes that may arise from the contractual agreements between the project parties, such as clients, suppliers, vendors, or subcontractors. This may result in legal, financial, or ethical risks, affecting the project delivery and satisfaction.

The other options are not correct because they list factors that contribute to PRODUCT risks, not project risks. Product risks are the uncertainties or threats that may affect the quality or functionality of the software product or system. Some of the factors that contribute to product risks are:

Poor software quality characteristics: This factor refers to the lack of adherence or compliance to the quality attributes or criteria of the software product or system, such as reliability, usability, security, performance, or maintainability. This may result in defects, failures, or dissatisfaction of the users or stakeholders.

Software does not perform its intended functions: This factor refers to the deviation or discrepancy between the expected and actual behavior or output of the software product or system. This may result in errors, faults, or malfunctions of the software product or system.

References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, Chapter 1: Fundamentals of Testing, Section 1.5: Risks and Testing, Pages 14-16.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The ratio-based estimation method relies on historical relationships between development and testing effort.

Using the given 5:3 ratio:

Thus, the correct answer is 270 person-days (D).

(A) and (C) are incorrect as they overestimate the effort.

(B) underestimates the testing effort based on the ratio.

Ratio-based estimation helps allocate resources effectively based on past project data.

In a formal review process, the recorder's role is typically responsible for documenting the findings of the review team, including action items, decisions, and recommendations. This ensures that there is an accurate record of what was discussed and agreed upon, facilitating follow-up and continuous improvement. Therefore, statement C is correct as per the ISTQB CTFL syllabus​​.

Static testing involves reviewing and inspecting the code, requirements, or design documents without executing the code. It can prevent defects, is effective early in the software development life cycle, and can help eliminate defects in user stories.

Option 1: "It can prevent defects by manual examination of the functional specification" - This is a value of static testing.

Option 2: "It is effective since it can be performed very early in the software development life cycle" - This is a value of static testing.

Option 3: "It can detect the failures in the running application" - This is a v​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​namic testing, not static testing.

Option 4: "It can help eliminate defects in user stories" - This is a value of static testing.

Option 5: "It can verify externally visible behaviors" - This is a value of dynamic testing, not static testing.

Therefore, the correct set of statements representing values only for static testing is 1, 2, 4, which corresponds to answer C【6†source】.

Exploratory testing is an experience-based test technique where testers actively engage with the software, learning about its behavior while simultaneously designing and executing tests. According to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus, exploratory testing can be structured into sessions guided by test charters, which outline the test objectives and provide direction for the testers' exploration. This method is particularly useful in situations where test documentation is limited or where rapid feedback is needed. Thus, option B correctly describes how exploratory testing can be organized​​.

 A test oracle is a mechanism or principle that can be used to determine whether the observed behavior or output of a system under test is correct or not1. A test oracle can be based on various sources of expected results, such as specifications, user expectations, previous versions, comparable systems, etc2. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Syllabus, Section 1.2.1, Page 91; ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 4.0, Page 332.

A test status report is a document that provides a snapshot of the testing activities and their progress during a particular period. It should include information about any impediments encountered during the test execution and the actions taken to resolve them, which helps stakeholders understand the challenges and how they were addressed​​ .

Option B describes an activity related to test completion rather than ongoing status reporting. Option C is incorrect because the structure and contents of the report may vary based on the audience's needs. Option D, while important, is not the primary purpose of a test status report, which focuses more on the current status and impediments.

Good traceability between the test basis and test work products provides several advantages: i. Analyzing the impact of changes: Traceability allows for easy identification of which parts of the test work products will be affected by changes in the requirements or design, facilitating impact analysis. iv. Making testing auditable: Traceability ensures that there is a clear connection between the requirements and the test cases, which makes the testing process auditable and provides evidence that all requirements have been tested​​.

The correct test execution sequence should consider both the dependencies between the requirements and their priorities. According to the diagram, the sequence begins with R2 (P1) as it is a prerequisite for R3 (P4). Then R1 (P3) can be tested. R3 follows as it depends on R2. Next, R7 (P4) should be tested before R6 (P3) and R5 (P2), as indicated by their dependencies. Finally, R4 (P1) and R8 (P1) can be tested. Therefore, the best sequence is R2, R1, R3, R7, R6, R5, R4, R8. Reference: ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 5.1.5

In the context of agile (iterative-incremental) development models, testing is integrated into the development process and occurs continuously throughout the lifecycle of the project. Agile testing emphasizes adaptability and the need for feedback at various stages of development.

Option C is correct because regression testing is indeed necessary whenever a new increment is added to the existing system. Agile development often involves frequent changes and additions to the codebase, which can potentially introduce new defects into previously tested code. Regression testing ensures that new changes have not adversely affected existing functionality.

Options A, B, and D present misconceptions about agile testing:

A is incorrect because, in agile, all types of testing (unit, integration, system, acceptance) are important and occur throughout the iteration, not just unit and acceptance tests.

B is incorrect because agile methodologies advocate for continuous integration and testing, where development and testing activities overlap and support each other throughout an iteration.

D is incorrect because agile methodologies encourage a wide range of testing types, including both functional and non-functional, as well as exploratory testing, to ensure a comprehensive quality assessment.

As a functional tester, you should open a defect report providing detailed information on which devices and by running which tests you observed the issue. A defect report is a document that records the occurrence, nature, and status of a defect detected during testing, and provides information for further investigation and resolution. A defect report should include relevant information such as the defect summary, the defect description, the defect severity, the defect priority, the defect status, the defect origin, the defect category, the defect reproduction steps, the defect screenshots, the defect attachments, etc. Opening a defect report is a good practice for any tester who finds a defect in the software system, regardless of the type or level of testing performed. The other options are not recommended, because:

The issue is related to performance efficiency, not functionality, but that does not mean that as a functional tester, you should not open any defect report as all the functional tests passed. Performance efficiency is a quality characteristic that measures how well the software system performs its functions under stated conditions, such as the response time, the resource utilization, the throughput, etc. Performance efficiency is an important aspect of the user experience, especially for web applications that run on different devices and networks. Even if the functional tests passed, meaning that the software system met the functional requirements, the performance issue observed on some devices could still affect the user satisfaction, the usability, the reliability, and the security of the software system. Therefore, as a functional tester, you have the responsibility to report the performance issue as a defect, and provide as much information as possible to help the developers or the performance testers to investigate and resolve it.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

BDD emphasizes collaboration between developers, testers, and business stakeholders to define system behavior in a readable format (A). It typically uses the Given-When-Then syntax. Unlike unit testing (B), BDD is at a higher level of abstraction. It does not focus solely on non-functional testing (C) and encourages early testing rather than post-development validation (D).

The test pyramid concept suggests that there should be more low-level tests (unit tests) and fewer high-level tests (end-to-end tests).

As we move higher up the pyramid (e.g., from unit tests to integration tests to end-to-end tests), each test covers more production code.

Higher-level tests (like end-to-end) validate larger parts of the application, including multiple units and their interactions.

This aligns with the principle that higher-level tests provide broader coverage but are fewer in number and more expensive to run and maintain.

Technical reviews are structured meetings that aim to examine various aspects of a product or project to identify any defects or improvements. Options A (Pre-meeting preparation by reviewers), B (Using checklists during the meeting), and D (Preparation of a review report) are typical activities in a technical review process. Inviting end-users to the meeting (C), however, is generally not part of a typical technical review, as these reviews are usually more focused on the technical aspects and are conducted by peers or experts within the development or testing teams rather than end-users​​.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

A test progress report provides an overview of testing activities, metrics, and identified risks. It focuses on tracking testing progress rather than evaluating overall product quality (B), which is typically included in a test summary report after testing is completed.

(A) is correct because obstacles (challenges) are reported to ensure test execution stays on track.

(C) is correct as test metrics help stakeholders track execution progress.

(D) is correct because new or changed risks impact test focus and priorities.

A test progress report tracks execution and informs stakeholders about ongoing testing activities.

In Agile teams using the planning poker technique for estimating user stories, it is common practice to have further discussions and rounds of estimation if there is a significant discrepancy in the initial estimates. This helps in reaching a consensus and ensures that all team members understand the complexity and requirements of the user story. According to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus, planning poker involves discussions to clarify differences in estimates, especially when there is a wide range of values selected. By having Memb6 and Memb4, who provided the most pessimistic and optimistic estimates, explain their reasoning, it fosters a deeper understanding and encourages the team to converge towards a more accurate and agreed-upon estimate.

The correct outcome of a two-value boundary value analysis applied to the password length is the set of test cases represented by option D. Boundary value analysis is a test design technique that focuses on the values at the boundaries of an equivalence partition, such as the minimum and maximum values, or the values just above and below the boundaries. A two-value boundary value analysis uses two values for each boundary, one representing the valid value and one representing the invalid value. For example, if the valid range of values is from 4 to 7, then the two values for the lower boundary are 3 and 4, and the two values for the upper boundary are 7 and 8. The test cases in option D use these values for the password length, while also satisfying the other requirements of the password, such as containing at least one numeric character, one capital letter, and one lowercase letter. The test cases in option D are:

1RhT: a 4-character password that is valid

rSp53: a 5-character password that is valid

3N3e10: a 6-character password that is valid

8sBdby: an 8-character password that is invalid The test cases in the other options are incorrect, because they either use values that are not at the boundaries of the password length, or they do not meet the other requirements of the password. For example, the test cases in option A are:

1xA: a 3-character password that is invalid, but it does not contain a capital letter

aB11: a 4-character password that is valid

Pq1ZZab: a 7-character password that is valid

7iDD0a1x: an 8-character password that is invalid References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.1, Black-box Test Design Techniques1

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Boundary Value Analysis, Equivalence Partition2

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Acceptance criteria 8 states that the system should charge the user on the first business day of the following month. However, the test cycle only verified monthly payments for over a year, without confirming whether payments were processed specifically on the first business day.

(B) is incorrect because the test validated monthly and annual payment options.

(C) is incorrect because not all criteria were fully validated.

(D) is incorrect because OTP verification (6) was tested as part of registration.

Ensuring timely execution of payments (Criteria 8) requires additional validation.

A correct list of boundary values for the P input should include the minimum and maximum values of the valid range (15 and 350), as well as the values just below and above the boundaries (14 and 351). Boundary value analysis is a test design technique that involves testing the values at or near the boundaries of an input domain or output range, as these values are more likely to cause errors than values in the middle. Option B satisfies this condition, as it has all four boundary values (14, 15, 350, 351). Option A has only two boundary values (14 and 351), option C has only two boundary values (15 and 350), and option D has no boundary values at all. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 34.

This answer is correct because identifying potential anomalies in the work product under review is one of the tasks the Author is responsible for, as part of a typical formal review. The Author is the person who creates the work product to be reviewed, such as a requirement specification, a design document, or a test case. The Author’s tasks include preparing the work product for the review, identifying potential anomalies in the work product, and fixing the anomalies found in the work product after the review. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.4.2.1

An incident is any event that occurs during testing that requires investigation. An incident report is a document that records the details of an incident. The next step the tester should take prior to recording the deviation is to try to recreate the incident before reporting. This can help confirm that the incident is reproducible and not caused by a random or external factor. This can also help gather more information about the incident, such as the steps to reproduce it, the expected and actual results, the severity and priority of the incident, or any screenshots or logs that can illustrate the incident. Trying to identify the code fragment causing the problem is not the next step the tester should take prior to recording the deviation, as this is a debugging activity that is usually performed by developers after receiving the incident report. Sending an email to the developer and not reporting the bug is not the next step the tester should take prior to recording the deviation, as this is an informal and unstructured way of communicating incidents that can lead to confusion, inconsistency or loss of information. Reporting the incident as is without any further action is not the next step the tester should take prior to recording the deviation, as this can result in incomplete or inaccurate incident reports that can hamper the investigation and resolution of incidents. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 3, page 32-33.

For boundary value analysis, the test cases should include the boundary values just inside and just outside the equivalence partition for the 13% interest rate range:

R100,000 (just inside the previous range)

R100,001 (start of the 13% range)

R500,000 (end of the 13% range)

R500,001 (just outside the range)

These values ensure that both the edges of the partition are tested​​.

When a manager asks when testing will be complete, the most appropriate and informative resource to provide an answer is test progress reports (Option A). Test progress reports contain detailed information on the status of testing activities, including what has been accomplished, what remains to be done, the results of the tests conducted, and any issues or risks that might impact the completion of testing. These reports allow for an informed assessment of the testing progress and estimation of when testing might be completed. Options B, C, and D do not provide the structured, detailed, and specific information required to accurately answer the manager's question about the completion of testing.

Use cases describe a system's behavior as it responds to a request from a user. They typically consist of various scenarios, such as basic flow, alternative flow, and exceptional flow, which represent possible behaviors when a user interacts with the system. When deriving test cases from use cases, it is important to cover these different types of user behaviors.

Test cases should be designed to verify how the system behaves during each of these scenarios. This ensures that the system operates correctly for normal and error conditions encountered by human users or systems interacting with the application. Thus, test cases derived from use cases aim to cover basic, exceptional, and alternative flows, ensuring comprehensive coverage.

The absence-of-errors fallacy, as explained in the ISTQB syllabus, is the erroneous belief that having fewer defects found in testing equates to a system being more successful upon release. This misconception can lead stakeholders to undervalue thorough testing. Answer C illustrates this fallacy perfectly: assuming that because few defects were found, the system will be successful, neglects the many other factors that contribute to system success, including user satisfaction and fit-for-purpose.

The following statements about risk-based testing are correct:

II) Tests should be prioritized to find tie critical detects as early as possible. Risk-based testing involves prioritizing tests based on risk level, which reflects both the likelihood and impact of defects or failures. Tests with higher risk level should be executed earlier than tests with lower risk level, in order to find and fix critical defects as soon as possible.

III) Non-testing activities may also help to reduce risk. Risk-based testing does not only involve testing activities, but also other activities that can help mitigate risks, such as reviews, inspections, audits, simulations or prototyping.

The question is about marking the correct sentences among the given statements related to defects, failures, and mistakes. According to the ISTQB glossary, the definitions of these terms are1:

Defect: A flaw in a component or system that can cause the component or system to fail to perform its required function, e.g. an incorrect statement or data definition. A defect, if encountered during execution, may cause a failure of the component or system.

Failure: An event in which a component or system does not perform a required function within specified limits.

Mistake: A human action that produces an incorrect result.

Therefore, out of the five given statements, only two are correct, namely:

A human mistake may produce a defect: This is true, as a mistake is a source or cause of a defect, e.g. a programmer may make a mistake in writing a code statement, which results in a defect in the software component.

When a defect exists in a system it may result in a failure: This is true, as a defect is a potential or actual cause of a failure, e.g. a defect in the software component may cause the system to fail to perform a required function when the defect is encountered during execution.

The other three statements are incorrect, namely:

Defects are a result of environmental conditions and are also referred to as “Failures”: This is false, as defects are not a result of environmental conditions, but of mistakes or other factors, and defects are not the same as failures, but rather the causes of failures.

A system will totally fail to operate correctly when a failure exists in it: This is false, as a system may not necessarily fail completely or stop operating when a failure occurs, but may continue to operate with reduced functionality or performance, or with incorrect results.

Defects occur only as a result of technology changes: This is false, as defects can occur due to various reasons, not only technology changes, such as human mistakes, design flaws, requirement changes, hardware failures, etc.

A key skill for testers is the ability to use various tools to automate repetitive tasks, enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of testing processes. This includes tools for test execution, test management, and defect tracking. The ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 emphasizes the importance of using tools to improve productivity and reduce manual effort in repetitive testing tasks, making this a critical skill for testers​​.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The planning phase of the review process (C) includes defining the review’s purpose, scope, and exit criteria to ensure alignment. Option A is part of the defect management phase, B happens during individual preparation, and D takes place in the review meeting.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Statement coverage strategy prioritizes test cases with higher statement coverage first, while resolving dependencies before execution.

TC60 (7%) has the highest coverage but depends on REQ 1, so it should be executed after its dependency is covered.

TC80 (6%) depends on REQ 2, so it should be prioritized after TC40 (REQ 2).

TC40 (5%) and TC90 (5%) should be executed early.

Lower coverage test cases (TC10, TC70, TC30, TC20) should come last.

Thus, the correct order is {TC 60; TC 80; TC 40; TC 90; TC 50; TC 10; TC 70; TC 30; TC 20} (D).

Test planning involves defining the overall approach to testing, including scheduling, resources, and milestones. It is during this phase that the detailed schedule for each testing activity is determined based on estimates, resource availability, and constraints. The ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 outlines that test planning encompasses the creation of test plans and schedules to ensure that testing activities are properly managed and controlled​​.

This answer is correct because code-related white-box test techniques are test design techniques that use the structure of the code to derive test cases. They provide an objective measure of coverage, such as statement coverage, branch coverage, or path coverage, which indicate how much of the code has been exercised by the test cases. Code-related white-box test techniques can be used to complement black-box test techniques, which are test design techniques that use the functional or non-functional requirements of the system or component to derive test cases. By combining both types of techniques, testers can increase their confidence in the code and find more defects. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.3.2.2

Involving testers only during the testing phase is incorrect as per the ISTQB CTFL syllabus. Effective involvement of testers is crucial throughout the entire software development lifecycle (SDLC). This includes early stages such as requirement analysis and design, which allows testers to understand the design decisions and detect defects early. Early involvement helps in better understanding the project and ensures that quality is built into the product from the beginning. Furthermore, the ISTQB syllabus emphasizes the importance of testers contributing to all activities in the SDLC, including design discussions, to enhance defect detection and prevention.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Non-functional testing includes testing of both technical and non-technical quality characteristics. Non-functional testing is the process of testing the quality attributes of a system, such as performance, usability, security, reliability, etc. Non-functional testing can be applied at any test level and can use both black-box and white-box test techniques. Non-functional testing can cover both technical aspects, such as response time, throughput, resource consumption, etc., and non-technical aspects, such as user satisfaction, accessibility, compliance, etc. Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

Metrics can be collected during and at the end of testing activities to assess various aspects including progress against the planned schedule and budget, the current quality of the test object, the adequacy of the test approach, and the effectiveness of the test activities with respect to the objectives. Collecting these metrics helps in understanding the overall performance and quality of the testing process​​.

Pair reviews are informal and typically involve two people reviewing the work product together, often in an informal setting. Walkthroughs are more formal and aim to educate stakeholders and evaluate the product, serving the dual purpose of improving the product and training participants. Technical reviews have a strong focus on improving the product's quality, often involving technical stakeholders. Inspections are the most formal review type and are aimed primarily at detecting defects.

In an Agile project, a tester's responsibilities include understanding, implementing, and updating the test strategy (i), actively collaborating with developers and business stakeholders to clarify requirements, especially in terms of testability, consistency, and completeness (iv), and participating proactively in team retrospective meetings, suggesting and implementing improvements (v). These activities ensure that testing is integrated into the development process, promoting continuous feedback and improvement. The ISTQB CTFL syllabus underlines the collaborative nature of Agile testing and the tester's role in contributing to the team's overall quality goals.

This answer is correct because test implementation is the activity where test work products, such as test cases, test data, test scripts, test harnesses, test stubs, or virtual services, are created and verified. Test implementation also involves setting up the test environment and preparing the test execution schedule. A virtual service emulating a real third-party service and the automated test scripts that interact with that service are examples of test work products that are typically created during test implementation. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.2.2.3

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Test management focuses on planning and control activities. Test planning (II) involves defining test strategies, schedules, and resources, while test monitoring and control (V) ensures that testing activities are aligned with objectives and tracked effectively. Other activities, such as test design (I) and peer review facilitation (IV), are typically handled by testers or test leads.

A typical entry criterion for testing is the availability of testable requirements. Testable requirements provide a basis for designing and executing test cases. Without clear and testable requirements, it is challenging to determine what needs to be tested and to create effective test cases. Entry criteria ensure that the necessary preconditions are met before testing begins, which helps in conducting efficient and effective testing.

A defect report is a document that records the details of a defect found during testing. A defect report typically contains the following items:

Identifier: A unique identifier for the defect report

Summary: A concise summary of the defect

Description: A detailed description of the defect, including the steps to reproduce it, the expected and actual results, and any relevant screenshots or logs

Severity: The degree of impact that the defect has on the system

Priority: The level of urgency for resolving the defect

Status: The current state of the defect, such as new, open, resolved, closed, etc.

Resolution: The action taken to resolve the defect, such as fix, workaround, reject, etc. Out of these items, the one that is not needed to specify in a defect report is how to fix the defect. How to fix the defect is a technical solution that is usually determined by the developer who is assigned to resolve the defect. How to fix the defect is not part of the defect report, but rather part of the code change or patch that is delivered to fix the defect. The other items are needed to specify in a defect report, as they provide essential information for identifying, tracking and resolving defects. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 3, page 32-33.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Retrospectives provide value by fostering improvement and collaboration. The correct mapping is:

A2: Team bonding occurs when teams openly discuss issues.

B1: Test effectiveness increases when process improvements are implemented.

C4: Test basis improves by addressing requirement deficiencies.

D3: Cooperation improves through regular review of collaboration.

The correct set of data for valid equivalence class partitions should include one value from each equivalence class, and no value from outside the range. Option C satisfies this condition, as it has one value from each of the four equivalence classes (50, 100, 250, 500). Option A has two values from the same equivalence class (100 and 200), option B has values outside the range (0 and 0.99), and option D has two values from the same equivalence class (1000 and 500). Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 35.

The activities of checking test results and logs against specified coverage criteria, assessing the level of component or system quality based on test results and logs, and determining whether more tests are needed fall under the category of test monitoring and control. This phase involves ongoing assessment and adjustment of the test activities to ensure they meet the test objectives and quality goals​​.

Applicable acceptance test cases for the given user story should focus on the specific requirement of deleting an individual item from the shopping list and ensuring that it is removed in less than 1 second. Therefore, the valid test cases are: i. Click on my online shopping list, select the unwanted item, delete the unwanted item, the unwanted item is deleted from the shopping list in less than 1 second. iii. Tab to the online shopping list and press enter, select the unwanted item, delete the unwanted item, the unwanted item is deleted from the shopping list in less than 1 second.

There are two main approaches to test estimation:

Expert-based approach:

The Wideband Delphi estimation technique is an example of this approach.

Involves consulting expert​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​ate testing efforts.

This technique gathers estimates from multiple experts, discusses their differences, and achieves consensus.

Metrics-based approach:

Relies on historical data and metrics to predict future testing efforts.

According to the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, the expert-based approach relies on experts' experience and knowledge, which aligns with the Wideband Delphi technique【6†source】.

The fact that defects are usually not evenly distributed among the various modules that make up a software application, but rather their distribution tend to reflect the Pareto principle, is expressed by the testing principle referred to as ‘Defects cluster together’. This principle states that a small number of modules contain most of the defects detected, or that a small number of causes are responsible for most of the defects. This principle can be used to guide the test analysis and design activities, by prioritizing the testing of the most critical or risky modules, or by applying more rigorous test techniques to them. Therefore, option C is the correct answer.

In a formal review, the roles involved typically include the author, management, facilitator (also known as moderator), review leader, reviewers, and scribe. Each role has specific responsibilities to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of the review process:

The author creates and refines the work product being reviewed.

Management allocates resources and supports the review process.

The facilitator manages the review meeting, ensuring it proceeds smoothly.

The review leader plans the review and ensures it meets its objectives.

Reviewers examine the work product to identify defects.

The scribe records issues raised during the review meeting​​.

 The V-model is a software development life cycle model that defines four test levels that correspond to four development phases: component (unit) testing with component design, integration testing with architectural design, system testing with system requirements, and acceptance testing with user requirements. The V-model emphasizes the importance of verifying and validating each phase of development with a corresponding level of testing, and ensuring that the test objectives, test basis, and test artifacts are aligned and consistent across the test levels. Therefore, an organization that wants to follow the V-model cannot do away with integration testing, as it would break the symmetry and completeness of the V-model, and compromise the quality and reliability of the software or system under test. Integration testing is a test level that aims to test the interactions and interfaces between components or subsystems, and to detect any defects or inconsistencies that may arise from the integration of different parts of the software or system. Integration testing is essential for ensuring the functionality, performance, and compatibility of the software or system as a whole, and for identifying and resolving any integration issues early in the development process. Skipping integration testing would increase the risk of finding serious defects later in the test process, or worse, in the production environment, which would be more costly and difficult to fix, and could damage the reputation and credibility of the organization. Therefore, the correct answer is D.

The other options are incorrect because:

A. It is not allowed as organizations can decide on the test levels to do depending on the context of the system under test. While it is true that the choice and scope of test levels may vary depending on the context of the system under test, such as the size, complexity, criticality, and risk level of the system, the organization cannot simply ignore or skip a test level that is defined and required by the chosen software development life cycle model. The organization must follow the principles and guidelines of the software development life cycle model, and ensure that the test levels are consistent and coherent with the development phases. If the organization wants to have more flexibility and adaptability in choosing the test levels, it should consider using a different software development life cycle model, such as an agile or iterative model, that allows for more dynamic and incremental testing approaches.

B. It is not allowed because integration testing is not an important test level and can be dispensed with. This statement is false and misleading, as integration testing is a very important test level that cannot be dispensed with. Integration testing is vital for testing the interactions and interfaces between components or subsystems, and for ensuring the functionality, performance, and compatibility of the software or system as a whole. Integration testing can reveal defects or inconsistencies that may not be detected by component (unit) testing alone, such as interface errors, data flow errors, integration logic errors, or performance degradation. Integration testing can also help to verify and validate the architectural design and the integration strategy of the software or system, and to ensure that the software or system meets the specified and expected quality attributes, such as reliability, usability, security, and maintainability. Integration testing can also provide feedback and confidence to the developers and stakeholders about the progress and quality of the software or system development. Therefore, integration testing is a crucial and indispensable test level that should not be skipped or omitted.

C. It is not allowed because integration testing is a very important test level and ignoring it means definite poor product quality. This statement is partially true, as integration testing is a very important test level that should not be ignored, and skipping it could result in poor product quality. However, this statement is too strong and absolute, as it implies that integration testing is the only factor that determines the product quality, and that ignoring it would guarantee a poor product quality. This is not necessarily the case, as there may be other factors that affect the product quality, such as the quality of the requirements, design, code, and other test levels, the effectiveness and efficiency of the test techniques and tools, the competence and experience of the developers and testers, the availability and adequacy of the resources and environment, the management and communication of the project, and the expectations and satisfaction of the customers and users. Therefore, while integration testing is a very important test level that should not be skipped, it is not the only test level that matters, and skipping it does not necessarily mean definite poor product quality, but rather a higher risk and likelihood of poor product quality.

References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Version 4.0, 2018, Section 2.3, pages 16-18; ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 4.0, 2018, pages 38-39; ISTQB CTFL 4.0 - Sample Exam - Answers, Version 1.1, 2023, Question 104, page 36.

Data migration testing is a critical part of maintenance testing during the decommissioning of a system. When a system is decommissioned, data often needs to be transferred to another system or archived securely. This process ensures that the data remains intact, accessible, and secure in its new location. Therefore, statement B is true as it aligns with the ISTQB CTFL syllabus guidelines on handling system decommissioning and data preservation​​.

Failures can be caused by defects, but also by environmental conditions. A failure is an event in which the software system does not perform a required function or performs a function incorrectly, according to the expected behavior. A defect is a flaw in the software system or a deviation from the requirements or the specifications, that may cause a failure. However, not all failures are caused by defects, as some failures may be caused by environmental conditions, such as hardware malfunctions, network interruptions, power outages, incompatible configurations, etc. Environmental conditions are factors that affect the operation of the software system, but are not part of the software system itself. The other statements are false, because:

A defect does not always produce a failure, while a bug always produces a failure. This statement is false, because a defect may or may not produce a failure, depending on the inputs, the outputs, the states, or the scenarios of the software system, and a bug is just another term for a defect, so it has the same possibility of producing a failure as a defect. For example, a defect in a rarely used feature or a hidden branch of the code may never produce a failure, while a defect in a frequently used feature or a critical path of the code may produce a failure often. A bug is not a different concept from a defect, but rather a synonym or a colloquial term for a defect, so it has the same definition and implications as a defect.

A defect may cause a failure which, when occurring, always causes an error. This statement is false, because an error is not a consequence of a failure, but rather a cause of a defect. An error is a human action or a mistake that produces a defect in the software system, such as a typo, a logic flaw, a requirement misunderstanding, etc. An error is not observable in the software system, but rather in the human mind or the human work products, such as the code, the design, the documentation, etc. A failure is not a cause of an error, but rather a result of a defect, which is a result of an error. For example, an error in the code may cause a defect in the software system, which may cause a failure in the software behavior.

Bugs are defects found during component testing, while failures are defects found at higher test levels. This statement is false, because bugs and failures are not different types of defects, but rather different terms for defects and their manifestations. As mentioned before, bugs are just another word for defects, and failures are the events in which the software system does not perform as expected due to defects. Bugs and failures can be found at any test level, not only at component testing or higher test levels. Test levels are the stages of testing that correspond to the levels of integration of the software system, such as component testing, integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing. Defects and failures can occur and be detected at any test level, depending on the test objectives, the test basis, the test techniques, and the test environment. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.1.2, Testing and Quality1

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

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

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Failure, Defect, Bug, Environmental Condition, Error, Test Level2

A correct list of boundary values for the P input should include the minimum and maximum values of the valid range (15 and 350), as well as the values just below and above the boundaries (14 and 351). Boundary value analysis is a test design technique that involves testing the values at or near the boundaries of an input domain or output range, as these values are more likely to cause errors than values in the middle. Option B satisfies this condition, as it has all four boundary values (14, 15, 350, 351). Option A has two values from the same equivalence class (1000 and 99999), option C has two values outside the range (999 and 100000), and option D has no boundary values at all. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 34.

An incident report is a document that records the details of an incident. An incident report typically contains the following items:

Identifier: A unique identifier for the incident report

Summary: A concise summary of the incident

Description: A detailed description of the incident, including the steps to reproduce it, the expected and actual results, and any relevant screenshots or logs

Severity: The degree of impact that the incident has on the system

Priority: The level of urgency for resolving the incident

Status: The current state of the incident, such as new, open, resolved, closed, etc.

Resolution: The action taken to resolve the incident, such as fix, workaround, reject, etc. Based on the information given in the question, the tester would be able to write down all of these items except for the test case identifier. A test case identifier is a unique identifier for a test case that is used to link it to other test artifacts, such as test plans, test scripts, test results or incident reports. However, since the tester is performing exploratory testing, there is no predefined test case that can be associated with the incident. Exploratory testing is an approach to testing that emphasizes learning, test design and test execution at the same time. Exploratory testing relies on the tester’s skills, creativity and intuition to explore the software under test and discover defects. Exploratory testing does not use formal test cases or scripts, but rather uses test charters or missions that guide the tester’s actions and objectives. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 3, page 32-33; Chapter 5, page 47-48.

Statement coverage is a structural coverage metric that measures the percentage of executable statements in the source code that are executed by a test suite1. Decision coverage is another structural coverage metric that measures the percentage of decision outcomes (such as branches or conditions) in the source code that are executed by a test suite1. Decision coverage is a stronger metric than statement coverage, because it requires that every possible outcome of each decision is tested, while statement coverage only requires that every statement is executed at least once2. Therefore, if a test suite achieves 100% decision coverage, it also implies that it achieves 100% statement coverage, because every statement in every branch or condition must have been executed. However, the converse is not true: 100% statement coverage does not guarantee 100% decision coverage, because some branches or conditions may have multiple outcomes that are not tested by the test suite2. For example, consider the following pseudocode:

if (x > 0) then print(“Positive”) else print(“Non-positive”) end if

A test suite that executes this code with x = 1 and x = -1 will achieve 100% statement coverage, because both print statements are executed. However, it will not achieve 100% decision coverage, because the condition x > 0 has only been tested with two outcomes: true and false. The third possible outcome, x = 0, has not been tested by the test suite. Therefore, the test suite may miss a potential bug or error in the condition or the branch.

The other options, such as stale transition coverage, equivalence class coverage, and boundary value coverage, are not guaranteed to be 100% by achieving 100% decision coverage. Stale transition coverage is a structural coverage metric that measures the percentage of transitions between states in a state machine that are executed by a test suite3. Equivalence class coverage is a functional coverage metric that measures the percentage of equivalence classes (or partitions) of input or output values that are tested by a test suite4. Boundary value coverage is another functional coverage metric that measures the percentage of boundary values (or extreme values) of input or output ranges that are tested by a test suite4. These metrics are independent of decision coverage, because they are based on different aspects of the system under test, such as its behavior, functionality, or specification. Therefore, achieving 100% decision coverage does not imply achieving 100% of any of these metrics, and vice versa. References = ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Test Coverage in Software Testing - Guru99, Structural Coverage Metrics - MATLAB & Simulink - MathWorks India, Test Design Coverage in Software Testing - GeeksforGeeks.

Good testing practice dictates that each test level (e.g., unit testing, integration testing, system testing) should have distinct test objectives aligned with the phase of the software development lifecycle it addresses. This ensures that testing is effective and relevant at each stage. According to the ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0, establishing clear test objectives that are consistent with the development phase helps in achieving specific goals and improving the overall quality of the software product​​.

Test-driven development is not an example of a typical generic skill required for testing, but rather an example of a specific technical skill or a development practice that may or may not be relevant for testing, depending on the context and the objectives of the testing activities. Test-driven development is an approach to software development and testing, in which the developers write automated unit tests before writing the source code, and then refactor the code until the tests pass. Test-driven development can help to improve the quality, the design, and the maintainability of the code, as well as to provide fast feedback and guidance for the developers. However, test-driven development is not a skill that is generally expected or needed for testers, especially for testers who are not involved in unit testing or who do not have access to the source code. The other options are examples of typical generic skills required for testing, which are skills that are applicable and beneficial for testing in any context or situation, regardless of the specific testing techniques, tools, or methods used. The typical generic skills required for testing include:

Be able to use test management tools and defect tracking tools: These are tools that help testers to plan, organize, monitor, and control the testing activities and resources, as well as to record, track, analyze, and resolve the defects detected during testing. These tools can improve the efficiency, the effectiveness, and the communication of the testing process, as well as to provide traceability, metrics, and reports for the testing outcomes.

Be able to communicate defects and failures to developers as objectively as possible: This is a skill that involves the ability to report and describe the defects and failures found during testing in a clear, concise, accurate, and unbiased manner, using relevant information, evidence, and terminology, without making assumptions, judgments, or accusations. This skill can facilitate the collaboration, the understanding, and the resolution of the defects and failures between the testers and the developers, as well as to prevent conflicts, misunderstandings, or blame games.

Possess the necessary social skills that support effective teamwork: These are skills that involve the ability to interact, cooperate, and coordinate with other people involved in or affected by the testing activities, such as the test manager, the test team, the project manager, the developers, the customers, the users, etc. These skills can include communication, negotiation, leadership, motivation, feedback, conflict resolution, etc. These skills can enhance the quality, the productivity, and the satisfaction of the testing process, as well as to foster a positive and constructive testing culture. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

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

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.1.2, Testing and Quality

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

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

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Test-driven Development, Test Management Tool, Defect Tracking Tool, Defect Report, Failure, Social Skill2

A valid criticism of this report is that the version of the application is missing. The version of the application is an important piece of information that should be included in a defect report, as it helps to identify which release or build of the software product contains the defect. The version of the application can also help to reproduce and debug the defect, as different versions may have different behaviors or features. The other options are not valid criticisms of this report. The priority, the correction description and the developer name are not missing, but rather not applicable for this report. The priority is a measure of how urgently a defect needs to be fixed, which can be assigned by the project manager or the defect tracking system, not by the tester who reports the defect. The correction description and the developer name are information that are added after the defect has been resolved, not when it has been reported. There is no link to the applicable requirement (traceability) is not a valid criticism of this report, because traceability is not a mandatory attribute of a defect report, but rather an optional one. Traceability is a relationship between two or more entities (such as requirements, test cases, defects, etc.) that shows how they are related or dependent on each other. Traceability can help to verify that the requirements are met by the test cases and defects, but it is not essential for reporting a defect. The description is not highlighting the source of the problem is not a valid criticism of this report, because highlighting the source of the problem is not a responsibility of the tester who reports the defect, but rather of the developer who fixes the defect. The description should provide enough information to describe what happened when the defect occurred, such as input values, expected results, actual results, error messages, screenshots, etc., but it does not need to explain why or how it happened. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 140.

Rule 5 in the decision table indicates that when the object is within 5 metres of the vehicle and the sensitivity mode is switched "on", no LED is lit. This matches the conditions and actions described in the decision table provided, ensuring that only the red LED is lit when the sensitivity mode is on and the object is within 1 metre, otherwise no LED is lit .

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

During iteration planning, testers provide input on risk analysis, testability, and the feasibility of test automation. Participating in risk analysis (B) helps identify areas needing more extensive testing.

(A) is incorrect because the test strategy is usually set at a higher level (project or release level).

(C) is incorrect as release planning is broader than iteration planning.

(D) is incorrect since writing user stories is mainly the responsibility of the product owner, though testers contribute to defining acceptance criteria.

Risk-based test prioritization ensures testing efforts are aligned with business needs and software risks.

The whole team approach involves collaboration among all team members, including testers, developers, and business representatives, to achieve quality goals. However, this approach may not be suitable in situations where a high level of test independence is required. Test independence is essential in cases where unbiased testing is critical, such as in regulated environments or where high-risk systems are involved. This is because team members might unintentionally influence each other's work, leading to potential bias in testing outcomes​​.

Equivalence partitioning and boundary value analysis are test design techniques that are most appropriate for testing the login page of a web site. The page contains fields for user name and password, which are input values that can be divided into partitions of equivalent data. Equivalence partitioning is a technique that divides the input data and output results of a software component into partitions of equivalent data. Each partition should contain data that is treated in the same way by the component. Equivalence partitioning can be used to reduce the number of test cases by selecting one representative value from each partition. Boundary value analysis is a technique that tests boundary values between partitions of equivalent data. Boundary values are values at the edge of an equivalence partition or at the smallest incremental distance on either side of an edge. Boundary value analysis can be used to detect defects caused by incorrect handling of boundary conditions. For example, for testing the user name field, we can identify two equivalence partitions: valid user name (existing and correct) and invalid user name (non-existing or incorrect). The boundary values for these partitions are the minimum and maximum length of user name allowed by the system.

Decision table testing and state transition testing are not suitable for testing the login page of a web site, as they are more applicable for testing components that have multiple inputs and outputs that depend on logical combinations of conditions or events. Decision table testing is a technique that shows combinations of inputs and/or stimuli (causes) with their associated outputs and/or actions (effects). State transition testing is a technique that models how a system transitions from one state to another depending on events or conditions.

Exploratory testing and statement coverage are not suitable for testing the login page of a web site, as they are more applicable for testing components that require learning, creativity and intuition or structural analysis. Exploratory testing is an approach to testing that emphasizes learning, test design and test execution at the same time. Exploratory testing relies on the tester’s skills, creativity and intuition to explore the software under test and discover defects. Statement coverage is a type of structural testing that measures how many statements in a program have been executed by a test suite. Statement coverage can be used to assess the adequacy or completeness of a test suite.

Decision coverage and fault attack are not suitable for testing the login page of a web site, as they are more applicable for testing components that have complex logic or potential errors. Decision coverage is a type of structural testing that measures how many decision outcomes in a program have been executed by a test suite. Decision coverage can be used to assess the adequacy or completeness of a test suite. Fault attack is a type of functional testing that deliberately introduces faults into a system in order to provoke failures or errors. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 4, page 34-46; Chapter 5, page 47-48.

Test Management tools are designed to support the planning, execution, and monitoring of the testing process. They provide features for managing test cases, test runs, tracking defects, and reporting on testing activities. However, the statement in option C describes Test Management tools as monitoring and reporting on the system's behavior during testing activities, which is not accurate. Test Management tools focus on the testing process itself rather than on the behavior of the system under test.

Test data preparation tools (A) indeed create and manage test data for use during test execution.

Test execution tools (B) automate the execution of test cases and the comparison of actual outcomes against expected results.

Test comparators (D) are tools that compare actual outcomes with expected outcomes, highlighting discrepancies.

Therefore, option C is the correct answer as it inaccurately describes the function of Test Management tools.

The set of test inputs that achieve the relatively highest equivalence partition coverage for grading students is option D: 69, 79, 80, 89, 90. This set effectively tests the boundaries between each grade category, ensuring that the grading system accurately transitions from one grade to another at the correct thresholds​ (ISTQB Main Web)​.

Matching the descriptions with the test techniques:

Black-box test techniques use the external description of the software, including requirements, use cases, and user stories.

White-box test techniques use the internal structure of the software system, including software architecture and code.

Black-box test techniques can reveal deviations from the requirements as they validate the external behavior of the software.

Both black-box and white-box test techniques are applicable to functional and non-functional testing.

Use case testing is a technique that helps identify test cases that exercise the whole system on a transaction by transaction basis from start to finish. Use cases are descriptions of how users interact with the system to achieve a specific goal. Use case testing is not focused on data flow, but rather on process flow. Use case testing can be performed by professional testers, customers or end users, depending on the context. Use case testing does not require the test cases to be designed by customers or end users, but rather by anyone who has access to the use case specifications. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 4, page 36.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Test analysis involves identifying the features to be tested and deriving test conditions. It is the phase where testers analyze the test basis (e.g., requirements, specifications) to identify testable aspects of the system. Test design (A) focuses on creating test cases, test implementation (C) involves preparing the test environment, and test execution (D) runs the tests.

This answer is correct because the whole-team approach is a way of working in agile projects where all team members share the responsibility for the quality of the product, and collaborate on delivering value to the customer. The whole-team approach involves testers, developers, business analysts, product owners, and other stakeholders in planning, designing, developing, testing, and delivering the product. The whole-team approach fosters communication, feedback, learning, and continuous improvement within the team. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 3.1.1.1

Using equivalence partitioning, the investment ranges are divided into four partitions:

R500 to R10,000 (10%)

R10,001 to R50,000 (11%)

R50,001 to R100,000 (12%)

R100,001 to R500,000 (13%)

Thus, the minimum number of test cases required to cover all valid equivalence partitions for calculating the interest is 4​​.

The benefits of continuous integration include: i. Allows earlier detection and easier root cause analysis of integration problems and conflicting changes. iv. Gives the development team regular feedback on whether the code is working. These benefits help in maintaining the stability and quality of the codebase by integrating and testing changes frequently and providing quick feedback to developers​​.

To achieve the highest level of transition coverage, one must consider all the possible transitions between the states in the given state model of the sales order software. The transitions in the sequence provided in Option B - "IN PRODUCTION -> SHIPPED -> INVOICED -> CANCELLED -> PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION" cover all the states and transitions effectively. This covers the transitions from IN PRODUCTION to SHIPPED, SHIPPED to INVOICED, INVOICED to CANCELLED, CANCELLED to PLACED, and PLACED to IN PRODUCTION, thereby maximizing the transition coverage.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Equivalence partitioning (EP) divides input values into classes where test cases represent all possible values of each partition. The partitions in this scenario are:

≤7 (too cold → W)

8-21 (standstill → X)

22-29 (ideal → Y)

≥30 (too hot → Z)

Option C ({7,10,25,29}) covers all partitions by selecting representative values:

7 → Too cold (W)

10 → Standstill (X)

25 → Ideal (Y)

29 → Upper boundary of ideal (Y)

Other options do not cover all partitions adequately.

The test engineer should re-run the tests, in order to ensure that new defects have not been introduced by the fix. This is also known as regression testing, which is a type of testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after a change. Regression testing helps to detect any side effects or unintended consequences of a fix or a modification. The other options are incorrect reasons for re-running the tests. The test engineer should not re-run the tests, as they have already been run, and results recorded, because this ignores the possibility of new defects caused by the fix. The test engineer should not re-run the tests, they should be part of the developer tests, because this assumes that developer tests are sufficient and reliable, which may not be true. The test engineer should not re-run the tests, because the defect shows that the test cases need to be updated, because this does not address the impact of the fix on other test cases or functionalities. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 41.

The correct answer can be derived by applying the given rules to each case:

A is ST certified and has 12 years of testing experience, which is more than 10 years. Therefore, A does not match any of the rules and the result is unknown.

B is not ST certified and has 7 years of testing experience, which is between 5 and 10 years. Therefore, B matches rule 3 and the result is limited access.

C is not ST certified and has 3 years of testing experience, which is less than 5 years. Therefore, C does not match any of the rules and the result is unknown. Verified References: This question does not require any external references, as it is based on logical reasoning.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Exhaustive testing (testing all input combinations) is practically impossible except in trivial cases (C). Instead, testers focus on risk-based, prioritized, and efficient test techniques. The seven principles of testing in the ISTQB syllabus highlight that exhaustive testing is infeasible, and therefore, techniques such as equivalence partitioning, boundary value analysis, and risk-based testing are used to optimize test coverage.

To achieve 100% statement coverage, we need to design test cases that ensure every statement in the given pseudo-code is executed at least once. Analyzing the pseudo-code, we notice that there are conditions based on two variables: Gender and Age. To cover all statements, we need to consider the paths that lead to each assignment of the Shoe Size variable.

Gender = Boy, Age <= 3 (Shoe Size assignment is not reached, but the condition is evaluated)

Gender = Boy, Age > 3 AND Age < 5 (Shoe Size = 1)

Gender = Boy, Age >= 5 AND Age < 7 (Shoe Size = 2)

Gender != Boy, Age <= 3 (Again, Shoe Size assignment is not reached, but the condition is evaluated)

Gender != Boy, Age > 3 AND Age < 5 (Shoe Size = 0)

Gender != Boy, Age >= 5 AND Age < 7 (Shoe Size = 1)

However, upon closer inspection, we see that tests 1 and 4 do not contribute to statement coverage as they do not lead to a Shoe Size assignment. Therefore, we only need 4 test cases to achieve 100% statement coverage, making option B the correct answer.

In Agile teams, close collaboration among testers and other team members can lead to organizational risks such as: ii. Close interaction with developers causes a loss of the appropriate tester mindset. iv. Testers, once they have acquired technical development or business skills, leave the testing team.

These risks highlight the potential issues of diminished testing perspective and team turnover when testers integrate closely with developers and other roles​​.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The whole-team approach promotes collaboration among stakeholders (business representatives, developers, and testers) to ensure better quality and project success (A). This approach allows for early identification of issues, enhances shared responsibility, and improves software quality. Option C is a valid but indirect benefit, while options B and D do not directly describe the core advantage of the whole-team approach.

This question asks for a non-functional aspect of testing the download process of a mobile application. Option A, "It was easy to locate, download and install the application," refers to usability, which is a non-functional quality attribute. Non-functional testing involves testing the system's attributes, such as usability, performance, reliability, etc., rather than specific behaviors or functions. Options B, "The application was correctly downloaded," C, "The application created an installation log file in a given folder," and D, "The application installed only after the user's approval," describe functional aspects, focusing on what the software does rather than how it performs or is experienced by the user.

Configuration management of testware is a critical aspect of maintaining the integrity and traceability of test assets throughout the testing lifecycle. The main benefit of configuration management is to ensure that all testware items, such as test cases, test scripts, test data, and test results, are systematically identified, version controlled, and tracked for changes in relation to each other.

Option C accurately describes this benefit. By applying configuration management principles to testware, teams can manage changes to test assets efficiently, ensuring that the testware remains consistent, up-to-date, and aligned with the version of the software under test. This control mechanism facilitates the reproducibility of tests, enhances the reliability of testing activities, and supports traceability from requirements through to defects.

Options A, B, and D describe other aspects of test management and testing processes but do not capture the core benefit of configuration management of testware, which is centered on the systematic control and tracking of testware items.

Maintenance testing is testing performed on a software product after delivery to correct defects or improve performance or other attributes. Maintenance testing can be triggered by various situations, such as modifications to a released software or system, migration of the system data to a replacement system, or retirement of the software or system. Maintenance testing is not executed when there is an update to the maintainability requirements during the development phase, as this is not a maintenance situation but rather a change request that should be handled by the development process. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 2, page 18-19.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Test execution involves running test cases and documenting results. Test logs (A) provide evidence of executed tests, failures, and actual outcomes. Automated test scripts (B) are part of test implementation, test plans (C) belong to test planning, and test conditions (D) are identified during test analysis.

Confirmation testing is performed after a defect is fixed, and if such testing is successful then the regression tests that are relevant for such fix can be executed. Confirmation testing, also known as re-testing, is the process of verifying that a defect has been resolved by running the test case that originally detected the defect. Confirmation testing is usually done before regression testing, which is the process of verifying that no new defects have been introduced in the software as a result of changes or fixes. Therefore, option D is the correct answer.

The minimum number of test cases needed to cover every unique sequence of up to 3 states/2 transitions starting in the “Start” state and ending in the “End” state is 4. This is because there are 4 unique sequences of up to 3 states/2 transitions starting in the “Start” state and ending in the “End” state:

Start -> Bet -> End

Start -> Deal -> End

Start -> 1st Deal -> End

Start -> 2nd Deal -> End References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Maintenance testing is carried out whenever changes are made to an existing system, including enhancements, defect fixes, and system migrations (C). It is not limited to adaptive maintenance (A) and is needed even when no defects are reported (B). Test cases are essential to validate fixes and prevent regressions (D).

A formal review is a type of review that follows a defined process with formal entry and exit criteria and roles and responsibilities for participants. A formal review can have various roles involved, such as manager, moderator, author, reviewer and scribe. The manager responsibilities in formal review include all except one of the following:

Planning the review (correct responsibility)

Determines if the review objectives have been met (incorrect responsibility)

Decide on the execution of reviews (correct responsibility)

Allocate time for review (correct responsibility) The responsibility of determining if the review objectives have been met belongs to the moderator role, not to the manager role. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 3, page 28-29.

This answer is correct because shift-left in testing is an approach that aims to perform testing activities as early as possible in the software development lifecycle, in order to find and fix defects faster and cheaper, and to improve the quality of the software product. Continuous integration is a practice that supports shift-left in testing, as it involves integrating and testing the software components frequently, usually several times a day, using automated tools and processes. Continuous integration can reduce the time between the introduction of a defect and its detection, thereby reducing the cost to fix it and the risk of accumulating defects that could affect the functionality or performance of the software product. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 3.1.1.3, Section 3.2.1.3

Equivalence partitioning is a black-box test design technique where inputs to the software or system are divided into groups that are expected to exhibit similar behavior. For an integer field that should accept values from 1 to 15, the valid equivalence class is 1 through 15. The invalid equivalence classes are numbers less than 1 and numbers more than 15. Therefore, option D, "Less than 1, 1 through 15, more than 15," correctly identifies the valid equivalence class along with the two invalid classes, covering all possible input scenarios for the field. Options A, B, and C either do not accurately capture the valid range or incorrectly specify the range boundaries.

Boundary Value Analysis (BVA) is a software testing technique in which tests are designed to include values at the boundaries. The concept is to focus on the boundaries since errors tend to occur at the edges of input ranges rather than in the middle.

Given the problem statement:

Up to $100.00 = 2%

$100.01 to $500.00 = 4%

$500.01 to $1,000.00 = 5%

Above $1,000.00 = 7%

Two-point boundary value analysis means testing the two boundaries of each range.

For each range:

The boundaries for "Up to $100.00" would be $100.00 and $100.01.

The boundaries for "$100.01 to $500.00" would be $100.00 and $500.00.

The boundaries for "$500.01 to $1,000.00" would be $500.00 and $1,000.00.

The boundaries for "Above $1,000.00" would be $1,000.00 and $1,000.01.

Now, let's examine the options:

A. $5.00, $100.00, $499.99, $1,000.00, $1,000.01

Missing $100.01 and $500.01.

B. $100.00, $100.01, $100.02, $500.00, $999.99

Covers $100.00, $100.01, $500.00, $1000.00, and $1000.01.

C. $100.00, $500.00, $1,000.00, $1,000.01

Missing $100.01 and $500.01.

D. $5.00, $100.00, $500.00, $1,000.01

Missing $100.01 and $500.01.

Given the options, B provides the highest boundary coverage​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​​ (Udemy)​.

Static analysis is a technique that analyzes the source code or other software artifacts without executing them. Static analysis can detect defects such as syntax errors, coding standards violations, potential security vulnerabilities, or logical flaws. Static analysis can catch the bug in the first implementation, as it contains two syntax errors: the variable y is declared twice, and the assignment statement X = y=z is invalid. Static analysis cannot catch the bugs in the other three implementations, as they are logical errors that do not violate any syntax rules, but produce incorrect results. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 3, page 25-26.

In a planning poker session, if there is a significant difference in the estimations, it indicates that there may be misunderstandings or different perspectives on the complexity of the user story. According to the agile principles, the team should discuss these differences to reach a common understanding. The goal is to ensure that all team members have a shared understanding of the user story's scope and complexity before finalizing the estimate​​.

A test tool used for the analysis of a developer's code prior to its execution falls under the category of static testing tools. Static testing involves examining the code and documentation without executing the code. These tools are used to perform static analysis, which helps in identifying potential defects and code quality issues early in the development process. The ISTQB CTFL syllabus specifies that static analysis tools are essential for finding defects that do not manifest themselves during the execution of the program.

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

, Requirements Engineering Fundamentals.

This answer is correct because the test procedures of all test cases that have been executed are not a typical content of a test completion report for a test project. A test completion report is a document that summarizes the test activities and results at the end of a test project. It usually includes information such as the test objectives, scope, approach, resources, schedule, results, deviations, issues, risks, lessons learned, and recommendations for improvement. The test procedures of all test cases that have been executed are part of the test documentation, but they are not relevant for the test completion report, as they do not provide a high-level overview of the test project outcomes and performance. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.5.3.2

Option D correctly explains what is represented by the lines A, B and the axes X, Y in a testing metrics chart. According to option D:

X-axis represents Time

Y-axis represents Count

Line A represents Number of open bugs

Line B represents Total number of executed tests

This information is essential in understanding and analyzing the testing metrics of a completed project.

Testing can contribute to higher quality by helping to measure the quality of software. Quality is defined as the degree to which a component or system satisfies specified requirements and customer or user needs and expectations. Testing is a process of evaluating a component or system by applying inputs and observing outputs, and comparing them with expected results. Testing can help to measure the quality of software by providing information on its functionality, performance, usability, security, reliability, etc. Testing can also help to identify and report defects in software, which can lead to improvement actions and quality assurance activities. The other options are not accurate descriptions of how testing can contribute to higher quality. Testing does not ensure that remaining defects are documented, but rather that detected defects are reported. Testing does not remove errors in software, but rather finds defects in software behavior or quality. Testing does not eliminate the risk with software, but rather assesses and manages the risk with software. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 3.

A decision table is a technique that shows combinations of inputs and/or stimuli (causes) with their associated outputs and/or actions (effects). A decision table consists of four quadrants: conditions (inputs), actions (outputs), condition entries (values) and action entries (results). The following statements about decision tables are true:

II. Test cases derived from decision tables can be used for component tests. Decision tables can be used to test components that have multiple inputs and outputs that depend on logical combinations of conditions. Decision tables can help cover all possible combinations or scenarios in a systematic way.

III. Several test cases can be selected for each column of the decision table. A column of a decision table represents a unique combination of condition entries and action entries. Several test cases can be selected for each column by varying other input values or expected results that are not part of the decision table. The following statements about decision tables are false:

I. Generally, decision tables are generated for low risk test items. Decision tables are not related to risk level, but rather to complexity level. Decision tables are generated for test items that have complex logic or multiple conditions and actions that need to be tested.

IV. The conditions in the decision table represent negative tests generally. The conditions in the decision table represent both positive and negative tests, depending on whether they are valid or invalid inputs for the test item. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 4, page 42-43.