CTFL_Syll_4.0 ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Question and Answers

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

Statement coverage strategyprioritizestest cases with higher statement coverage first, whileresolving dependenciesbefore execution.

TC60 (7%)has thehighest coveragebutdepends on REQ 1, so it should be executedafter its dependency is covered.

TC80 (6%)depends onREQ 2, so it should be prioritizedafter TC40 (REQ 2).

TC40 (5%)andTC90 (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).

Statement testingaims to executeevery executable statementin the source code at least once.

(D) is correctas statement testing ensuresmaximum statement execution.

(A) describes branch testing, which focuses on flow transfers.

(B) and (C) incorrectly mix decision testing and branch testing concepts.

Risk registeris a test planning work product as it documents identified risks and their mitigation strategies.

Risk informationfalls under test monitoring and control work products as it involves ongoing evaluation and reporting of risks.

Test casesare part of test design work products as they are derived from test conditions and designed to execute the testing scenarios.

Test conditionsbelong to test analysis work products as they define the items or events of a system that are to be tested​​.

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

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

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 orconditions 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.

In branch testing, a conditional branch represents a decision point in the software program where the flow of execution can take different paths based on specific conditions. For example, this could be an "if-else" statement, a "switch-case" statement, or loops where different execution paths are taken depending on the evaluated condition. This type of testing ensures that all possible paths and conditions are executed at least once, which helps in identifying any potential defects in different branches of the code​​.

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.

Test exit criteria are the conditions that must be fulfilled before concluding a particular testing phase. These criteria act as a checkpoint to assess whether we have achieved the testing objectives and are done with testing1. Test exit criteria are typically defined in the test plan document, which is one of the outputs of the test planning phase. The test plan document describes the scope, approach, resources, and schedule of the testing activities. It also identifies the test items, the features to be tested, the testing tasks, the risks, and the test deliverables2. According to the ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, the test plan document should include the following information related to the test exit criteria3:

The criteria for evaluating test completion, such as the percentage of test cases executed, the percentage of test coverage achieved, the number and severity of defects found and fixed, the quality and reliability of the software product, and the stakeholder satisfaction.

The criteria for evaluating test process improvement, such as the adherence to the test strategy, the efficiency and effectiveness of the testing activities, the lessons learned and best practices identified, and the recommendations for future improvements.

Therefore, the test plan document is the most appropriate test document to find the test exit criteria described. The other options, such as test design specification, project plan, and requirements specification, are not directly related to the test exit criteria. The test design specification describes the test cases and test procedures for a specific test level or test type3. The project plan describes the overall objectives, scope, assumptions, risks, and deliverables of the software project4. The requirementsspecification describes the functional and non-functional requirements of the software product5. None of these documents specify the conditions for ending the testing process or evaluating the testing outcomes. References = ISTQB® Certified TesterFoundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Entry and Exit Criteria in Software Testing | Baeldung onComputer Science, Entry And Exit Criteria In Software Testing - Rishabh Software, Entry and Exit Criteria in Software Testing Life Cycle - STLC [2022 Updated] - Testsigma Blog, ISTQB® releases Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0 (CTFL).

In the given decision table, Column 7 represents the following conditions and actions:

The patient is over 18 years old: True

The patient is allergic to Penicillin: True

The patient is taking anticoagulant therapy: True

When analyzing this column:

If the patient is over 18 years old, allergic to Penicillin, and taking anticoagulant therapy, the decision table suggests consultation with a hematologist and prescribing half of the full recommended dosage for 10 days.

This column does not represent an impossible situation based on the conditions provided. However, upon deeper inspection and understanding of medical practices, it can be argued that such a specificcombination of conditions could be highly unlikely, making it appear unnecessary or an edge case that might be considered for deletion.

Given the constraints of the conditions and the requirements of the decision table, the provided answer needs to be verified against real-world medical guidelines to confirm if this scenario is indeed impossible or just

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

“Checklist items are often phrased in the form of a question. It should be possible to check each item separately and directly… Checklists can be created to support various test types, including functional and non-functional testing…”

(ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0, Section 4.4.3 – Checklist-Based Testing, Page 44)

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

Independent testers provide a fresh perspective and are more likely to identify failures that developers might overlook due to their familiarity with the software (C). Independent testing helps avoid cognitive biases, improves defect detection, and enhances the overall quality assurance process. While A and D touch on related concepts, they do not directly define the benefit as well as C does. Option B highlights a potential challenge rather than a benefit.

Test automation allows you to produce tests that are less subject to human errors, as they can execute predefined test scripts or test cases with consistent inputs, outputs, and expected results. Test automation can also reduce the manual effort and time required to execute repetitive or tedious tests, such as regression tests, performance tests, or data-driven tests. Test automation does not demonstrate the absence of defects, as it can only verify the expected behavior of the system under test, not the unexpected or unknown behavior. Test automation does not avoid performing exploratory testing, as exploratory testing is a valuable technique to discover new information, risks, or defects that are not covered by automated tests. Test automation does not increase test process efficiency by facilitating management of defects, as defect management is a separate activity that involves reporting, tracking, analyzing,and resolving defects, which may or may not be related to automated tests. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 3.3.1, Test Automation1

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Test Automation2

Equivalence partitioning involves dividing input data into partitions that are treated the same by the system under test. The given specifications create overlapping partitions:

For n<0n < 0n<0, an error message "Value out of range" is issued.

For 0

For 100

However, the range between 0 and 100 is exclusive of 0 and 100, meaning that the partitions overlap and create ambiguity for the boundary values. Thus, the correct statement is that the requirements are not correct because the partitions are overlapping​​.

The business-facing quadrant that supports the team is focused on tests that validate the system against user stories. These tests ensure that the system delivers the value and functionality described by the user stories, which are central to agile methodologies.

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.

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

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

The other options are not correct because:

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

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

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

References =

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

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

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

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

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

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

 The thought process of the software company is incorrect, because it assumes that each artifact can be reviewed using only one review method, and that the review method depends solely on the criticality of the artifact. This is a simplistic and rigid approach that does not consider the benefits and limitations of different review methods, the context and purpose of the review, and the feedback and improvement opportunities that can be gained from multiple reviews. According to the CTFL 4.0 Syllabus, the selection of review methods should be based on several factors, such as the type and level of detail of the artifact, the availability and competence of the reviewers, the time and budget constraints, the expected defects and risks, and the desired outcomes and quality criteria. Moreover, the same artifact can be reviewed using different review methods at different stages of the development lifecycle, to ensure that the artifact meets the changing requirements, standards, and expectations of the stakeholders. For example, a requirement specification can be reviewed using an informal review method, such as a walkthrough, to get an initial feedback from the users and developers, and then using a formal review method, such as an inspection, to verify the completeness, correctness, and consistency of the specification. Therefore, the software company should adopt a more flexible and context-sensitive approach to selecting and applying review methods for different artifacts, rather than following a fixed and arbitrary rule. References = CTFL 4.0 Syllabus, Section 3.2.1, page 31-32; Section 3.2.2, page 33-34; Section 3.2.3, page 35-36.

The correct tool forcreating test cases, test data, and test proceduresis atest design and implementation tool (A).

(B) is incorrectas static testing tools focus oncode analysis, not test case creation.

(C) is incorrectbecause DevOps tools manageautomation pipelines, not test design.

(D) is incorrectbecause test execution tools focus onrunning tests rather than designing them.

Test design tools helpoptimize test coverage, reduce redundancy, and improve efficiency.

A test-first approach involves writing tests before writing the code. In this approach, initially, the tests fail because the corresponding functionality is not yet implemented. Afterward, the code is written or modified to make the tests pass. This cycle is repeated iteratively. This method ensures that the code is developed based on predefined tests and helps in identifying issues early in the development process​​.

BDD emphasizes collaboration between developers, testers, and business stakeholders to define system behavior in a readable format (A). It typically uses theGiven-When-Thensyntax. 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 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, suchas 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

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

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

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

Static analysis is the process of examining the work products of a software development or testing activity without executing them. Static analysis can be applied to various types of work products, such as requirements, design, code, test cases, etc. However, test plans are not suitable for static analysis, because they are high-level documents that describe the test objectives, scope, strategy, resources, schedule, and risks of a testing project. Test plans are not executable or formalized in a way that static analysis tools can analyze them. Therefore, option A is the correct answer.

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

≤7 (too cold → W)

8-21 (standstill → X)

22-29 (ideal → Y)

≥30 (too hot → Z)

OptionC ({7,10,25,29})covers all partitionsby 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.

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

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.

To reproduce a defect easily, the defect report should include detailed steps that clearly describe how to encounter the issue. This includes the specific actions taken, the expected result, and the actual result observed. In the given defect report, it is not clear if the issue occurs for any scheduled exam or if it is user-specific. Providing exact steps helps developers and testers replicate the issue and understand its context better, leading to quicker and more effective resolution​​.

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

Business, development, and testing (C)are the three key perspectives inagile user story refinement:

Business (Product Owner, Stakeholders)– Ensures the story aligns with user needs and business goals.

Development (Developers)– Provides insights on feasibility and technical constraints.

Testing (Testers, QA)– Ensures testability, acceptance criteria, and risk identification.

(A) is incorrectbecause the product owner is part of business stakeholders.

(B) is incorrectbecause architecture is part of development, but not the primary driver of user stories.

(D) is incorrectbecauseacceptance testing is a process, not a stakeholder group.

Across-functional team collaborationensureswell-defined, testable, and feasibleuser stories.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

From the user story analysis and final achievements:

It was confirmed that dues were paid monthly for over a year, whichcovers criteria 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8.

However, there isno mention of testing for “annual payment”, soacceptance criteria 4, which involveschoosing between monthly or annualpayment, wasnot fully tested.

This reflects the requirement stated in:

“Acceptance criteria are used to: Define the scope… Describe both positive and negative scenarios… Serve as a basis for the user story acceptance testing.”

(ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0, Section 4.5.2, Page 45)

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

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

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

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

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

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

The unscripted tests produced by the tester’s experience during the two-hour test session belong to the testing quadrant Q3. The testing quadrants are a classification of testing types based on two dimensions: the test objectives (whether the testing is focused on supporting the team or critiquing the product) and the test basis (whether the testing is based on the technology or the business). The testing quadrants are labeled as Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4, and each quadrant represents a different testing perspective, such as unit testing, acceptance testing, usability testing, or performance testing. The testing quadrant Q3 corresponds to the testing types that have the objective of critiquing the product from the business perspective, such as exploratory testing, usability testing, user acceptance testing, alpha testing, beta testing, etc. The unscripted tests performed by the tester in the given scenario are examples of exploratory testing and usability testing, as they are based on the tester’s experience, intuition, and learning of the web application, and they focus on some specific usability issues, such as the user interface, the user satisfaction, the user feedback, etc. The other options are incorrect, because:

The testing quadrant Q1 corresponds to the testing types that have the objective of supporting the team from the technology perspective, such as unit testing, component testing, integration testing, system testing, etc. These testing types are usually performed by developers or testers who have access to the source code, the design, the architecture, or the configuration of the software system, and they aim to verify the functionality, the quality, and the reliability of the software system at different levels of integration.

The testing quadrant Q2 corresponds to the testing types that have the objective of supporting the team from the business perspective, such as functional testing, acceptance testing, story testing, scenario testing, etc. These testing types are usually performed by testers or customers who have access to the requirements, the specifications, the user stories, or the business processes of the software system, and they aim to validate that the software system meets the expectations and the needs of the users and the stakeholders.

The testing quadrant Q4 corresponds to the testing types that have the objective of critiquing the product from the technology perspective, such as performance testing, security testing, reliability testing, compatibility testing, etc. These testing types are usually performed by testers or specialists who have access to the tools, the metrics, the standards, or the benchmarks of the software system, and they aim to evaluate the non-functional aspects of the software system, such as the efficiency, the security, the reliability, or the compatibility of the software system under different conditions or environments. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

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

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Testing Quadrant, Exploratory Testing, Usability Testing, Unit Testing, Component Testing, Integration Testing, SystemTesting, Functional Testing, Acceptance Testing, Story Testing, Scenario Testing, Performance Testing, Security Testing, Reliability Testing, Compatibility Testing

Acceptance criteria8states thatthe system should charge the user on the first business day of the following month. However, thetest cycle only verified monthly payments for over a year, without confirming whether payments were processedspecifically on the first business day.

(B) is incorrectbecause the test validatedmonthly and annual payment options.

(C) is incorrectbecause not all criteria were fully validated.

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

Ensuringtimely execution of payments(Criteria 8) requires additional validation.

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 defectreport 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.

Selecting a tester with the required knowledge related to compliance and standards is a correct mitigation option, especially in a highly regulated domain like healthcare. This approach ensures that the tester understands the specific regulatory requirements and standards applicable to the software, thereby reducing the risk of non-compliance. This is more effective than just increasing the number of testers, as it directly addresses the knowledge and expertise needed to mitigate specific product risks​​.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Theshift-left approachfocuses on executing testing activitiesas early as possiblein the software development lifecycle, including static testing, unit tests, and early reviews. Activities like writing tests before code (test-first) and continuous integration are central to this principle.

However, performingnon-functional testing at the system test levelhappenslaterin the lifecycle and doesnotalign with the shift-left philosophy.

“The shift-left approach involves the adoption of practices to move tasks related to testing (e.g., reviews, test design) to earlier stages in the lifecycle.”

(ISTQB CTFL v4.0 Syllabus, Section 2.1.5 – Shift-Left Approach)

“Non-functional testing is often performed at the system test level, but the shift-left approach aims to begin such testing earlier, possibly at integration or even unit levels.”

(ISTQB CTFL v4.0 Syllabus, Section 2.2.2 – Test Types)

Therefore,Option Ddoes not correspond to shift-left practices and is the correct answer.

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.

Dynamic testing requires the execution of the software to evaluate its behavior and performance. In contrast, static testing involves examining the software's code, design, and documentation without executing the software. This makes static testing applicable to non-executable work products such as requirement documents, design documents, and source code.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Test automationimproves efficiency and accuracy, butit does NOT eliminate manual testing (D).

(A) is correctbecause automationspeeds up execution.

(B) is correctas automated tests produceconsistent and unbiased results.

(C) is correctbecause automationreduces human errors in repetitive tests.

However,manual testing remains essential for exploratory testing, usability testing, and complex test scenarios.

In a review process, the manager's responsibility is to ensure that sufficient time is allocated for the review activities. This includes planning and scheduling the review sessions, making sure that the team has enough time to conduct a thorough and effective review.

 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 theinteractions 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 necessarilythe 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.

Checklist-based testingusesspecific test conditions(B) that help testers ensure key aspects are validated. The checklist items can be derived from past defects, requirements, or regulatory standards.

(A) is incorrectbecause general guidelines lack specificity.

(C) is incorrectbecause checklists can be used for both manual and automated testing.

(D) is incorrectbecause checklists are useful for both functional and non-functional testing (e.g., security, performance).

Checklistshelp ensure completenesswithout enforcingstrictly scriptedexecution.

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

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.

Configuration management (B)ensures thatversions of software and test artifactsare properly tracked, stored, and retrievable. It allows teams to:

Restoreearlier versions of software and test work products

Maintaintraceability between requirements, tests, and code

Avoid discrepancies due tomismanaged versions

(A) is incorrectbecause defect managementtracks issues but does not restore versions.

(C) is incorrectbecause change managementcontrols changes but does not track past versions.

(D) is incorrectbecause risk managementassesses risks but does not manage software versions.

Effective configuration management ensures the ability to roll back changesand maintain system stability.

Atest planis amanagement documentthat outlines thescope, objectives, schedule, resources, and risksof the testing process. Thebudget and schedule (A)are essential components as they help plan resources and timeline constraints.

(B) is incorrectbecause defect analysis is part of thetest summary report, not the test plan.

(C) is incorrectbecausefinal reports summarize execution, while the test plan is createdbefore testing starts.

(D) is incorrectbecause test logs areexecution artifactsrather than planning elements.

A test planguides testing activities and ensures alignment with project objectives.

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

The test pyramid is a concept that illustrates the different levels of testing and their relative quantities. The pyramid suggests that there should be more low-level unit tests than high-level end-to-end tests. As you move up the pyramid, the scope of each test increases, meaning each higher level test typically covers more of the production code.

Unit Tests:Form the base of the pyramid and cover individual units of code. They are numerous because they are quick to write and execute.

Service/Integration Tests:Sit in the middle of the pyramid and cover interactions between integrated units or services.

UI/End-to-End Tests:At the top of the pyramid, these tests cover entire workflows and user interactions, making them fewer in number due to their complexity and execution time.

Option B accurately describes that the higher the layer of the test pyramid, the more production code a single automated test tends to cover because these higher-level tests involve broader functionalities and interactions compared to unit tests.

Exercising at least one of the decision outcomes for all decisions within the code, ensures achieving full branch coverage, which is a test coverage criterion that requires that all branches in the control flow of the code are executed at least once by the testcases. A branch is a basic block of code that has a single entry point and a single exit point, and a decision is a point in the code where the control flow can take more than one direction, such as an if-then-else statement, a switch-case statement, a loop statement, etc. The decision outcomes are the possible paths that can be taken from a decision, such as the then branch or the else branch, the case branch or the default branch, the loop body or the loop exit, etc. The other statements are false, because:

The minimum number of test cases needed to achieve full branch coverage, is usually higher than that needed to achieve full statement coverage, which is a test coverage criterion that requires that all executable statements in the code are executed at least once by the test cases. This is because branch coverage is a stronger criterion than statement coverage, as it implies statement coverage, but not vice versa. For example, a single test case can achieve full statement coverage for an if-then-else statement, but two test cases are needed to achieve full branch coverage, as both the then branch and the else branch need to be exercised.

If full branch coverage has been achieved, then all unconditional branches within the code have not necessarily been exercised, as unconditional branches are branches that do not depend on any decision, and are always executed, such as a goto statement, a break statement, a return statement, etc. Unconditional branches are not part of the branch coverage criterion, as they do not represent different paths in the control flow of the code. However, they are part of the statement coverage criterion, as they are executable statements in the code.

If full branch coverage has been achieved, then all combinations of conditions in a decision table have not necessarily been exercised, as a decision table is a test design technique that represents the logical relationships between multiple conditions and their corresponding actions, in a tabular format. A decision table can have more combinations of conditions than the number of decision outcomes in the code, as each condition can have two or more possible values, such as true or false, yes or no, etc. For example, a decision table with four conditions can have 16 combinations of conditions, but the corresponding code may have only two decision outcomes, such as pass or fail. To exercise all combinations of conditions in a decision table, a stronger test coverage criterion is needed, such as condition combination coverage, which requires that all possible combinations of condition outcomes in the code are executed at least once by the test cases. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.3.1, Test Coverage Criteria Based on the Structure of the Software

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Branch Coverage, Statement Coverage, Branch, Decision, Decision Outcome, Unconditional Branch, Decision Table, Condition Combination Coverage

During release planning, a tester adds value by assessing the testability of user stories. This involves evaluating whether the user stories are clear, concise, and testable. The tester ensures that the acceptance criteria are well-defined and that the stories can be effectively tested within the given timeframe.