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

Static analysis tools are software tools that examine the source code of a program without executing it. They can detect various types of issues, such as syntax errors, coding standards violations, security vulnerabilities, and potential bugs12. However, static analysis tools cannot identify issues that depend on the runtime behavior or performance of the program, such as very low MTBF (Mean Time Between failure)3. MTBF is a measure of the reliability of a system or component. It is calculated by dividing the total operating time by the number of failures. MTBF reflects how often a system or component fails during its expected lifetime. Static analysis tools cannot measure MTBF because they do not run the program or observe its failures. MTBF can only be estimated by dynamic testing, which involves executing the program under various conditions and collecting data on its failures4. Therefore, very low MTBF is an issue that cannot be identified by static analysis tools. The other options, such as potentially endless loops, referencing a variable with an undefined value, and security vulnerabilities, are issues that can be identified by static analysis tools. Static analysis tools can detect potentially endless loops by analyzing the control flow and data flow of the program and checking for conditions that may never become false5. Static analysis tools can detect referencing a variable with an undefined value by checking the scope and initialization of variables and reporting any use of uninitialized variables6. Static analysis tools can detect security vulnerabilities by checking for common patterns of insecure code, such as buffer overflows, SQL injections, cross-site scripting, and weak encryption. References = What Is Static Analysis? Static Code Analysis Tools - Perforce Software, How Static Code Analysis Works | Perforce, Static Code Analysis: Techniques, Top 5 Benefits & 3 Challenges, What is MTBF? Mean Time Between Failures Explained | Perforce, Static analysis tools - Software Testing MCQs - CareerRide, ISTQB_Chapter3 | Quizizz, [Static Code Analysis for Security Vulnerabilities | Perforce].

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

State transition testing validates valid and invalid state transitions based on defined rules.

D is invalid because it transitions from DIAGNOSTIC MODE directly to EMERGENCY MODE, which is not a valid state change in most systems.

Other options follow valid sequences according to state transition rules.

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.

A static analysis tool is best suited for determining source code compliance with coding standards. These tools analyze the code without executing it and can check for adherence to coding standards, syntax errors, and other static properties of the code. The ISTQB CTFL syllabus emphasizes the role of static analysis tools in verifying that code meets predefined standards and guidelines.

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​​.

The acceptance criteria associated with a user story are the conditions that must be met for the user story to be considered done and to deliver the expected value to the user. They are often written in different formats, such as rule-oriented, scenario-oriented, or table-oriented, depending on the nature and complexity of the user story. They represent an aspect of a user story referred to as confirmation, which is one of the so called “3 C’s” of user stories. The other two aspects are card and conversation. Card refers to the concise and informal description of the user story, usually following the template: “As a [role], I want [feature], so that I can [benefit]”. Conversation refers to the ongoing dialogue between the stakeholders and the team members to clarify and refine the user story and its acceptance criteria. Therefore, option C is the correct answer.

An incident report during testing should focus on factual observations of failures or defects in the system, including their impacts and how they deviate from expected results. Options A, C, and D describe specific issues that are directly related to the system's behavior or performance and are suitable for inclusion in an incident report. Option B, which describes the user interface as "complicated and confusing" and relates to the tester's personal difficulty in following the test script, is more subjective and relates to the tester's experience rather than an objective observation of a system failure. Therefore, option B is the least appropriate for an incident report​​.

A decision table is a technique that should be used to cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an Automated Teller Machine (ATM). A decision table 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). A decision table can be used to test components that have multiple inputs and outputs that depend on logical combinations of conditions. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify three input conditions: the bank card is valid, the PIN code is correct, and money is available in the user’s account. We can also identify four output actions: the card is rejected, the ATM asks for another PIN code, the ATM asks for another amount, and the ATM dispenses the money. A decision table can show all possible combinations of these conditions and actions in a systematic way.

Use case based testing is not a technique that can cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an ATM. Use case based testing is a technique that verifies that a software product or system meets its specified requirements or user stories by executing realistic scenarios or workflows. Use case based testing can be used to test components that have complex or dynamic interactions with users or other systems. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify several use cases, such as withdraw money, check balance, transfer money, etc. Each use case can have one or more scenarios that describe the steps and outcomes of the interaction. However, use case based testing may not cover all possible combinations of input conditions, as some scenarios may be omitted or overlooked.

Boundary value analysis is not a technique that can cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an ATM. 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 test components that have input values that can be divided into partitions of equivalent data. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify boundary values for the input amount, such as the minimum and maximum amount allowed by the system or the user’s account. However, boundary value analysis may not cover all possible combinations of input conditions, as some conditions may not have boundary values or may not be related to input values.

Equivalence class partitioning is not a technique that can cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an ATM. Equivalence class 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 class partitioning can be used to test components that have input values that can be divided into partitions of equivalent data. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify equivalence partitions for the input amount, such as valid amount (within the range allowed by the system and the user’s account) and invalid amount (outside the range allowed by the system or the user’s account). However, equivalence class partitioning may not cover all possible combinations of input conditions, as some conditions may not be related to input values or may have more than two partitions. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 4, page 34-46.

Branch coverage is a type of structural coverage metric that measures the percentage of branches or decision outcomes that are executed by the test cases. A branch is a point in the code where the control flow can take two or more alternative paths based on a condition. For example, an if-else statement is a branch that can execute either the if-block or the else-block depending on the evaluation of the condition. Branch coverage ensures that each branch is taken at least once by the test cases, and thus reveals the behavior of the software under different scenarios. Branch coverage is also known as decision coverage or all-edges coverage.

Branch coverage is suitable for testing the cases where a specific action is not allowed, because it can verify that the test cases cover all the possible outcomes of the conditions that determine the action. For example, if the program has a condition that checks if the manufacturing stage can be stopped, then branch coverage can ensure that the test cases cover both the cases where the stage can be stopped and where it cannot be stopped. This way, branch coverage can help identify any missing or incorrect branches that may lead to undesired or unsafe actions.

The other options are not correct because they are not suitable for testing the cases where a specific action is not allowed. Code coverage is a general term that encompasses various types of coverage metrics, such as statement coverage, branch coverage, data flow coverage, etc. Code coverage does not specify which type of coverage metric is used for the analysis. Data flow coverage is a type of structural coverage metric that measures the percentage of data flow paths that are executed by the test cases. A data flow path is a sequence of statements that define, use, or kill a variable. Data flow coverage is useful for testing the correctness and completeness of the data manipulation in the software, but not for testing the conditions that determine the actions. Statement coverage is a type of structural coverage metric that measures the percentage of statements or lines of code that are executed by the test cases. Statement coverage ensures that each statement is executed at least once by the test cases, but it does not reveal the behavior of the software under different scenarios. Statement coverage is a weaker criterion than branch coverage, because it does not account for the branches or decision outcomes in the code. References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, Chapter 4: Test Techniques, Section 4.3: Structural Testing Techniques, Pages 51-54.

Statement Testing is a type of white-box testing technique where the test cases are designed based on the implementation of the software, specifically aiming to execute every statement in the code at least once. This falls under the category of structure-based testing (also known as white-box testing), where the internal structure of the system is used to design test cases. Therefore, option D is correct​​.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The Agile Testing Quadrants framework categorizes tests based on their purpose and audience:

Quadrant 1 (Q1): Technology-facing tests (unit and component tests).

Quadrant 2 (Q2): Business-facing tests supporting development (e.g., BDD tests).

Quadrant 3 (Q3): Business-facing tests that critique the system (B).

Includes usability testing, exploratory testing, and UAT to ensure software meets user expectations.

Quadrant 4 (Q4): Technology-facing tests that critique the system (e.g., performance, security testing).

Option B correctly defines Q3 since it focuses on evaluating the user experience, exploring the system, and validating business expectations.

The correct statement is B. According to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus, the testing quadrants help to categorize tests based on their purpose and whether they are technology-facing or business-facing, and whether they support the team or critique the product. Quadrant Q2 includes tests that are business-facing and support the team, such as automated acceptance tests produced during Behavior-Driven Development (BDD) and Acceptance Test-Driven Development (ATDD)​​ .

Quadrant Q3 includes business-facing tests that critique the product, such as exploratory testing, usability testing, and user acceptance testing. These tests are typically manual and focus on evaluating the product from a user perspective, rather than being part of a continuous integration process​​.

Quadrant Q4 includes technology-facing tests that critique the product, such as performance tests, security tests, and other non-functional tests, which can be automated but are not related to unit tests produced during TDD .

 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.

The key difference between the mindsets for test activities and development activities lies in the objectives: a tester is primarily concerned with finding defects to ensure product quality, while a developer focuses on designing and building solutions. This distinct focus helps ensure thorough quality checks and balances within the software development life cycle​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​.

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.

Selecting the right test technique is crucial because different techniques are suited to different types of testing and can significantly increase the effectiveness of the testing process by creating tests that are more likely to find defects. While reducing the number of tests (A) and defining the number of regression cycles (D) are considerations in the testing process, they are not the primary reasons for selecting a test technique. The assertion that the only way to test a software application is by using well-proven test techniques (B) is too restrictive and does not acknowledge the adaptability required in testing to suit different contexts and objectives. Therefore, option C is the most comprehensive reason, as it focuses on the effectiveness and efficiency of testing, leading to the creation of high-quality tests that have a higher chance of finding bugs.

An inspection is a type of review that follows a defined process with formal entry and exit criteria and roles and responsibilities for participants. An inspection can be performed by peers with different roles, such as moderator, author, reviewer and scribe. The following statement about inspection is not true:

B) The main purpose of an inspection is to find solutions to the problems. This statement is not true, as the main purpose of an inspection is to find defects or issues in a work product, not to find solutions to the problems. Finding solutions to the problems is a debugging or problem-solving activity that is usually performed by the author or developer after receiving the inspection report. The following statements about inspection are true:

A) An inspection may be led by a trained moderator who shall not be the author. This statement is true, as an inspection requires a moderator role who leads the inspection process and ensures that it follows the rules and standards. The moderator should be trained in inspection techniques and should not be the author of the work product under inspection, in order to avoid bias or conflict of interest.

C) An inspection can be performed by peers. This statement is true, as an inspection involves peer review, which means that the work product under inspection is evaluated by people who have similar roles or expertise as the author, but who are not directly involved in creating or modifying the work product.

D) An inspection shall follow a formal process based on rules and checklists with entry and exit criteria. This statement is true, as an inspection follows a formal process that consists of six main steps: planning, kick-off meeting, individual preparation, review meeting, rework and follow-up. Each step has defined rules and checklists to guide the participants and ensure consistency and quality. Each step also has entry and exit criteria to ensure that the prerequisites and objectives are met before moving to the next step. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 3, page 28-29.

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.

Confirmation testing, also known as retesting, is conducted to verify that specific defects have been fixed. Regression testing, on the other hand, is performed to ensure that recent changes have not adversely affected existing features of the software. Both types of testing are crucial for maintaining the integrity and quality of the software after modifications​​.

The choice of a software development lifecycle (SDLC) model is primarily influenced by the type of product being developed. Different products and project requirements may demand different SDLC models to address specific challenges and needs efficiently. For instance, a complex, safety-critical product might best be served by a Waterfall model due to its structured nature and phase dependencies, while a more iterative and incremental model might be suited for projects requiring frequent feedback and changes.

In maintenance testing, the relationship between impact analysis and regression testing is that the impact analysis is used to evaluate the amount of regression testing to be performed. Maintenance testing is a type of testing that is performed on an existing software product after it has been delivered or deployed, in order to ensure that it still meets its requirements and functions correctly after a change or a modification. Maintenance testing can be triggered by various reasons, such as corrective maintenance (fixing defects), adaptive maintenance (adapting to new environments), perfective maintenance (improving performance), preventive maintenance (avoiding future problems), etc. Impact analysis is a technique that is used to assess the extent and nature of changes introduced by maintenance activities on the software product or project. Impact analysis helps to identify which parts of the software product are affected by the changes, which parts need to be modified or updated accordingly, which parts need to be retested or verified for correctness or compatibility, etc. Regression testing is a type of testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after a change or a modification. Regression testing helps to detect any side effects or unintended consequences of maintenance activities on the software product’s functionality or quality. Regression testing can be performed at various levels and scopes depending on the impact analysis results. Therefore, in maintenance testing, impact analysis is used to evaluate the amount of regression testing to be performed. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 20.

The key difference between a peer review of code and static analysis of code using a tool lies in their approaches and scope. A peer review is a manual inspection of the code by peers or colleagues, focusing not only on the technical aspects of the code but also on other elements such as design, compliance with standards, and maintainability. Peer reviews can identify defects, suggest improvements, and ensure that the code adheres to best practices and team standards.

On the other hand, static analysis is an automated process performed by tools designed to analyze the code without executing it. These tools can detect potential issues such as syntax errors, vulnerabilities, and code smells based on predefined rules and patterns. While static analysis is technically focused, it lacks the broader perspective that human reviewers can provide, such as evaluating the code's maintainability or adherence to project-specific standards. Therefore, static analysis targets the code technically, whereas peer review encompasses a wider range of aspects, making option B the correct answer.

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.

A test progress report is prepared during a test activity and provides updates on the current status of testing activities, including progress made, issues encountered, and test metrics. A test summary report, on the other hand, is prepared at the end of a test activity and provides a comprehensive overview of the testing carried out, including the final status, test results, defect summaries, and overall conclusions.

Finding all defects in a product and ensuring it is defect-free is not a valid objective of testing. Testing aims to find as many defects as possible, build confidence in the quality of the product, and evaluate work products. However, it is unrealistic to expect testing to find all defects, and declaring a product completely defect-free is impractical.

According to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus, a defect is a deviation from the expected result which in this scenario is the incorrect discount applied to the customers. The root cause, as per the ISTQB definition, is the originating cause of a defect, which in this case is the incorrect requirement stating 50% instead of 5%. Therefore, the incorrect requirement is the root cause and the customer receiving the wrong discount is the effect of this root cause.

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).

For executive-level employees, a test summary report should be concise and focus on high-level information. It typically includes a summary of defects categorized by priority or budget. Executives are generally interested in the overall status and the impact on critical business objectives rather than detailed technical information. The report should provide an overview of the most important aspects of testing, such as key issues, test progress, and any risks or concerns that could affect project outcomes.

A static analysis tool is a tool that analyzes a given program’s source code or executable code without executing it. A static analysis tool can perform various types of analysis on a program’s code, such as syntax checking, data flow analysis, control flow analysis, complexity measurement, coding standards compliance checking, etc. Control flow analysis is a type of analysis that examines how a program’s statements are executed in different paths or branches. One of the most likely outcomes of control flow analysis is identification of unreachable code, which is code that can never be executed due to logical errors or design flaws. Unreachable code can reduce readability and maintainability of the code, as well as increase complexity and size. The other options are not outcomes of control flow analysis, but rather outcomes of other types of analysis. Report on adherence to coding standards is an outcome of coding standards compliance checking. Number of comment lines and number of source code lines are outcomes of complexity measurement. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 8.

A correct reason to apply test automation is when there are a lot of repetitive testing tasks. Test automation is the use of software tools or scripts to perform or support testing activities, such as test case execution, test result comparison, test data generation, etc. Test automation can be beneficial when there are a lot of repetitive testing tasks that need to be performed frequently or consistently, such as regression testing, performance testing, load testing, etc. Test automation can help to save time and effort, increase reliability and accuracy, and improve coverage and efficiency of testing. The other options are not correct reasons to apply test automation. When a new test automation tool is launched is not a reason to apply test automation, but rather a factor for choosing a test automation tool. When it is easy to automate is not a reason to apply test automation, but rather a factor for evaluating the feasibility of test automation. When it is cheap to buy test automation tools is not a reason to apply test automation, but rather a factor for estimating the cost and benefit of test automation. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 10.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

A test plan is a management document that outlines the scope, objectives, schedule, resources, and risks of the testing process. The budget and schedule (A) are essential components as they help plan resources and timeline constraints.

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

(C) is incorrect because final reports summarize execution, while the test plan is created before testing starts.

(D) is incorrect because test logs are execution artifacts rather than planning elements.

A test plan guides testing activities and ensures alignment with project objectives.

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 is suitable for a new project with little documentation and high probability for bugs, as it can help uncover unknown requirements, assumptions and risks. Exploratory testing is not requirements based testing, which is an approach to testing that derives test cases from documented requirements or specifications. Requirements based testing is not feasible for a new project with little documentation, as it requires clear and complete requirements to be available. Exploratory testing is not metric based approach, which is an approach to testing that uses quantitative measures to monitor and control the testing process and evaluate the quality of the software product. Metric based approach is not effective for a new project with high probability for bugs, as it may not capture all aspects of quality and may lead to false confidence or unrealistic expectations. Exploratory testing is not regression testing, which is an approach to testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after changes. Regression testing is not relevant for a new project with no previous versions or baselines. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 5, page 47-48.

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 correct list of boundary values for the age input should include the minimum and maximum values of each age group (0, 12, 13, 18), as well as the values just below and above each boundary (-1, 19). 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 A satisfies this condition, as it has all six boundary values (-1, 0, 12, 13, 18, 19). Option B has two values from the same equivalence class (12 and 13), option C has only four boundary values (0, 12, 18, 19), and option D has no boundary values at all. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 34.

The three-point test estimation technique is a method of estimating the test effort based on three initial estimates: the most optimistic, the most likely, and the most pessimistic. The technique uses a weighted average of these three estimates to calculate the final estimate, which is also known as the expected value. The formula for the expected value is:

Expected value = (most optimistic + 4 * most likely + most pessimistic) / 6

Using the given values, the expected value is:

Expected value = (6 + 4 * 30 + 54) / 6 Expected value = 30 person hours

However, the expected value is not the only factor to consider when estimating the test effort. The technique also calculates the standard deviation, which is a measure of the variability or uncertainty of the estimates. The formula for the standard deviation is:

Standard deviation = (most pessimistic - most optimistic) / 6

Using the given values, the standard deviation is:

Standard deviation = (54 - 6) / 6 Standard deviation = 8 person hours

The standard deviation can be used to determine a range of possible values for the test effort, based on a certain level of confidence. For example, using a 68% confidence level, the range is:

Expected value ± standard deviation

Using the calculated values, the range is:

30 ± 8 person hours

Therefore, the final estimate is between 22 person hours and 38 person hours, which is option A.

Test design is one of the fundamental activities in software testing, focusing on how tests will be structured and what strategies will be employed. As per the ISTQB syllabus, identifying appropriate test execution and automation tools is a task closely associated with test design activities because it directly influences how tests will be conducted, managed, and executed efficiently. This activity involves deciding on the tools that will best support the testing goals and requirements.

To determine the optimal test execution schedule that minimizes the number of configuration switches and respects the dependencies, we start with the initial configuration, CONF1.

TC4: It has no dependencies and runs on CONF1 (initial configuration).

TC3: Depends on TC4 and runs on CONF1. Since TC4 is already executed, we can proceed with TC3.

TC2: Depends on TC4 and runs on CONF2. We switch to CONF2 after TC3.

TC1: No dependencies and runs on CONF2. Since we are already in CONF2, we can execute TC1 next.

TC5: Depends on TC1 and runs on CONF2. Since TC1 is already executed, we can proceed with TC5 without additional configuration switches.

By following this sequence (TC4, TC3, TC2, TC1, TC5), we respect the dependencies and minimize the number of configuration switches

Test exit criteria are the conditions or requirements that must be met before testing can be concluded. Test exit criteria are usually defined in the test plan and agreed by the stakeholders. Test exit criteria can be based on various factors, such as test coverage, defect status, quality level, risk level, etc. Test schedules would be the least likely to be used as the basis for test exit criteria, because test schedules are not directly related to the quality or performance of the software product, but rather to the time or resources allocated for testing. Test schedules can be used as the basis for test entry criteria, which are the conditions or requirements that must be met before testing can start. The other options are more likely to be used as the basis for test exit criteria. Cost of testing performed so far can be used as a basis for test exit criteria, because it can indicate the return on investment or the cost-benefit ratio of testing. Confidence of testers in tested code can be used as a basis for test exit criteria, because it can reflect the level of satisfaction or assurance of the testers about the quality or reliability of the software product. Number of unfixed defects can be used as a basis for test exit criteria, because it can indicate the level of risk or impact of the remaining defects on the software product. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 13.

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

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Branch testing is a structural testing technique that ensures each branch (decision point) in the control flow is executed at least once. The goal is to measure branch coverage, which is the number of branches exercised divided by the total number of branches.

(A) describes statement testing, not branch testing.

(B) and (D) introduce confusion between decisions and statements, whereas branch testing focuses on control flow branches.

In simple terms, branch testing checks that all possible decision outcomes (true/false) are executed, whereas statement testing only ensures that each line of code is executed.

Product risk involves the potential issues that can affect the quality and functionality of the software product, such as defects, performance problems, and usability issues. Project risk, on the other hand, relates to the risks that can impact the project's schedule, budget, and resources, such as delays, cost overruns, and resource constraints. Understanding both types of risks is crucial for managing and mitigating potential problems in software projects.

The key principles of software testing include: i. Testing shows the presence of defects, not their absence. iv. Defects cluster together. v. Testing is context dependent. vi. Beware of the pesticide paradox. vii. Absence of errors is a fallacy. These principles highlight the importance of recognizing the limitations and context of testing, as well as the potential for repeated tests to become less effective​​.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Exploratory testing is an unscripted approach where testers actively design and execute tests based on their intuition, experience, and knowledge of the system. A test charter (A) provides a guideline on what areas to explore, defining test objectives but leaving room for dynamic adaptation.

(B), (C), and (D) contradict exploratory testing principles, which focus on freedom rather than rigid documentation.

Exploratory testing is especially useful in agile environments, usability testing, and uncovering unexpected defects.

Statements I, IV and V are valid testing principles according to the ISTQB syllabus. Statement I states that exhaustive testing is in general impossible, because it would require testing all possible inputs, outputs and combinations of states, which is usually impractical or impossible. Statement IV states that testing cannot guarantee that a program is correct, because testing can only show the presence of defects, not their absence. Statement V states that defects cluster together in certain areas of the product, which means that some modules or functions are more likely to contain defects than others. Statements II and III are invalid testing principles. Statement II states that exhaustive testing should be executed for code intended to be reused, which contradicts statement I. Statement III states that testing may guarantee that a program is correct, which contradicts statement IV. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, pages 4-5.

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​​.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The correct tool for creating test cases, test data, and test procedures is a test design and implementation tool (A).

(B) is incorrect as static testing tools focus on code analysis, not test case creation.

(C) is incorrect because DevOps tools manage automation pipelines, not test design.

(D) is incorrect because test execution tools focus on running tests rather than designing them.

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

This answer is correct because equivalence partitioning is a test design technique that divides the input domain of a system or component into partitions of equivalent data, such that each partition is expected to produce the same output or behavior. Equivalence partitioning aims to reduce the number of test cases by selecting one representative value from each partition. In this case, the input domain of the TAS can be divided into four partitions based on the bonus rules: less than 50k€, between 50k€ and 80k€, between 80k€ and 120k€, and more than 120k€. The test cases in the answer belong to the same partition, which is between 80k€ and 120k€, and they are expected to produce the same output, which is a bonus of 15%. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.3.2.1

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.

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

Static testing, such as code reviews and static analysis, is particularly effective at identifying issues related to code structure and modularization. These techniques allow for the inspection of the code without executing it, making it easier to spot problems related to how the code is organized. Dynamic testing, on the other hand, focuses on the execution of code and is better suited for identifying runtime issues but does not easily reveal structural problems. The ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 highlights the strengths of static testing in uncovering such structural issue

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​​.

The ISTQB fundamental test process consists of five main phases, as described in the ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus, Version 4.0, 2018, Section 2.2, page 15:

Test planning and control: This phase involves defining the test objectives, scope, strategy, resources, schedule, risks, and metrics, as well as monitoring and controlling the test activities and results throughout the test process.

Test analysis and design: This phase involves analyzing the test basis (such as requirements, specifications, or user stories) to identify test conditions (such as features, functions, or scenarios) that need to be tested, and designing test cases and test procedures (such as inputs, expected outcomes, and execution steps) to cover the test conditions. This phase also involves evaluating the testability of the test basis and the test items (such as software or system components), and selecting and implementing test techniques (such as equivalence partitioning, boundary value analysis, or state transition testing) to achieve the test objectives and optimize the test coverage and efficiency.

Test implementation and execution: This phase involves preparing the test environment (such as hardware, software, data, or tools) and testware (such as test cases, test procedures, test data, or test scripts) for test execution, and executing the test procedures or scripts according to the test plan and schedule. This phase also involves logging the outcome of test execution, comparing the actual results with the expected results, and reporting any discrepancies as incidents (such as defects, errors, or failures).

Evaluating exit criteria and reporting: This phase involves checking if the planned test activities have been completed and the exit criteria (such as quality, coverage, or risk levels) have been met, and reporting the test results and outcomes to the stakeholders. This phase also involves making recommendations for the release or acceptance decision based on the test results and outcomes, and identifying any residual risks (such as known defects or untested areas) that need to be addressed or mitigated.

Test closure activities: This phase involves finalizing and archiving the testware and test environment for future reuse, and evaluating the test process and the test project against the test objectives and the test plan. This phase also involves identifying any lessons learned and best practices, and communicating the findings and suggestions for improvement to the relevant parties.

References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Version 4.0, 2018, Section 2.2, page 15; ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 4.0, 2018, pages 37-38; ISTQB CTFL 4.0 - Sample Exam - Answers, Version 1.1, 2023, Question 88, page 32.

State transition testing is a black-box testing technique used to analyze the behavior of a system by examining the transitions between different states in response to events. In state transition testing, a state table or diagram is used to represent the states of a system and the transitions between these states triggered by events.

Option D is correct because in state transition testing, all transitions between states should be explicitly shown in the state table. This includes valid transitions that the system is expected to make under normal operation and, where relevant, invalid transitions that should be tested to ensure the system handles unexpected or erroneous inputs gracefully. The state table provides a comprehensive view of how the system should behave, making it possible to create tests that cover all defined transitions.

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

Component testing (also known as unit testing or module testing) is a level of testing that focuses on verifying the functionality and quality of individual software components (such as modules, classes, functions, methods, etc.). Component testing mainly tests interfaces and interaction between components, as well as internal logic and data structures of the components. Component testing may be applied using a test-first approach (such as test-driven development or behavior-driven development), where tests are written before the code is implemented. Component testing does not identify defects in modules and classes, as this is a result of component testing, not an objective. Simulators and stubs may be required for component testing, as they can simulate or replace missing or incomplete components or external systems that are needed for testing. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 19.

Confirmation testing, also known as re-testing, is performed to verify that specific defects have been successfully fixed.

Option A: "Testing due to the application of a new version of the interface" would typically involve regression testing, not confirmation testing.

Option B: "Testing that fixes resolved the defects in the search function" fits the description of confirmation testing as it focuses on ensuring that specific issues have been addressed.

Option C: "Testing if a system still works after update of an operating system" is an example of regression testing, as it checks the overall system behavior after an update.

Option D: "Testing to ensure the adding of new functionalities haven't broken existing functions" is another example of re​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​​ (Udemy)​ it checks for unintended consequences of new changes.

Therefore, the correct answer is B【6†source】【9†source】.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The primary objectives of testing, as outlined in the ISTQB CTFL v4.0 syllabus, include verifying whether specified requirements are met (A), detecting failures and defects (B), and validating that the test object functions as expected (D). However, "finding errors" (C) is not a direct objective. Errors result from human mistakes, but testing primarily identifies defects, which are flaws in the system that cause failures. Testing aims to reveal defects rather than directly identify errors in the code.

A unit test framework tool is a tool that supports the creation, execution, and reporting of unit tests, which are tests that verify the functionality and quality of individual software components (such as functions or methods) in source code. A unit test framework tool can help to detect defects in functions or methods in source code by providing features such as test case generation, test case execution, test result comparison, test coverage measurement, etc. Some examples of unit test framework tools are JUnit, NUnit, TestNG, etc. The other options are not tools that are likely to detect defects in functions or methods in source code. A configuration management tool is a tool that supports the management and control of different versions and variants of software products or components. A test design tool is a tool that supports the design and generation of test cases based on some criteria or rules. A monitoring tool is a tool that monitors the behavior or performance of a system or component under test. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 10.

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.

The whole team approach, often advocated in Agile methodologies, emphasizes collaboration and collective responsibility among all team members. This approach enhances the relationships within the team and improves overall collaboration, which in turn benefits the project's success. According to the ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0, the whole team approach fosters better communication and cooperation, leading to more effective problem-solving and higher-quality outcomes​​.

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

Entry and exit criteria are used to determine when to start and stop testing, respectively.

Entry Criteria:

These are conditions that should be met before testing begins.

Examples:

2. The test automation tool has been installed and properly configured

4. The performance test environment has been set-up and is available

5. The user stories have proper acceptance criteria defined

Exit Criteria:

These are conditions that should be met before testing concludes.

Examples:

1. A defined level of code coverage has been achieved

3. The number of unresolved defects is within the predefined limit

6. The testing budge​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​ spent and the project sponsor bears the risk of not testing any further

According to the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, these criteria help in effectively managing the testing process【6†source】.

The following statements about reviews are true:

I) In walkthroughs the review meeting is typically led by the author. A walkthrough is a type of review that has a predefined objective and agenda but no formal process or roles. A walkthrough is typically led by the author of the work product under review, who guides the participants through a scenario and solicits feedback.

IV) Management rarely participates in technical review meetings. A technical review is a type of review that has a predefined objective and agenda but no formal process or roles. A technical review is typically performed by peers with technical expertise in order to evaluate technical aspects of a work product. Management rarely participates in technical review meetings, as they may not have sufficient technical knowledge or skills to contribute effectively. The following statements about reviews are false:

II) Inspection is characterized by an open-ended review meeting. An inspection is a type of review that follows a defined process with formal entry and exit criteria and roles and responsibilities for participants. An inspection is characterized by a structured review meeting with a fixed duration and agenda.

III) Preparation before the review meeting is part of informal reviews. Preparation before the review meeting is part of formal reviews, such as inspections or technical reviews. Preparation involves checking

A typical product risk involves issues directly related to the software product's functionality, performance, usability, reliability, etc. Option A, "Poor usability of the software," directly impacts the end-user's interaction with the software and is a quality attribute of the product itself, making it a product risk. Options B, "A problem in the code developed by a 3rd party," C, "Low quality of the configuration data, test data and tests," and D, "Problem in defining the right requirements," can be considered either product or project risks depending on the context, but option A is the most directly associated with a typical product risk concerning the quality and usability of the software.

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.

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.

The test levels and their objectives can be matched as follows:

Verifying whether the functional and non-functional behaviors of the system are as designed and specified (A3: System testing).

Verifying whether the functional and non-functional behaviors of the interfaces are as designed (B2: Integration testing).

Verifying whether the functional and non-functional behaviors of the components are as designed and specified (C1: Component testing).

Establishing confidence in the quality of the system as a whole (D4: Acceptance testing)​​.

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.

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.

A successful review process involves all participants being trained in the review type and understanding its objectives. This ensures that everyone can contribute effectively and understand what is expected from the review. Proper training helps to identify defects accurately and facilitates constructive feedback, leading to a more efficient and effective review process. Hence, statement C is correct according to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus​​.

Structural testing is a type of testing that measures its effectiveness by tracking which lines of code were executed by the tests. Structural testing, also known as white-box testing or glass-box testing, is based on the internal structure, design, or implementation of the software. Structural testing aims to verify that the software meets the specified quality attributes, such as performance, security, reliability, or maintainability, by exercising the code paths, branches, statements, conditions, or data flows. Structural testing uses various coverage metrics, such as function coverage, line coverage, branch coverage, or statement coverage, to determine how much of the code has been tested and to identify any untested or unreachable parts of the code. Structural testing can be applied at any level of testing, such as unit testing, integration testing, system testing, or acceptance testing, but it is more commonly used at lower levels, where the testers have access to the source code.

The other options are not correct because they are not types of testing that measure their effectiveness by tracking which lines of code were executed by the tests. Acceptance testing is a type of testing that verifies that the software meets the acceptance criteria and the user requirements. Acceptance testing is usually performed by the end-users or customers, who may not have access to the source code or the technical details of the software. Acceptance testing is more concerned with the functionality, usability, or suitability of the software, rather than its internal structure or implementation. Integration testing is a type of testing that verifies that the software components or subsystems work together as expected. Integration testing is usually performed by the developers or testers, who may use both structural and functional testing techniques to check the interfaces, interactions, or dependencies between the components or subsystems. Integration testing is more concerned with the integration logic, data flow, or communication of the software, rather than its individual lines of code. Exploratory testing is a type of testing that involves simultaneous learning, test design, and test execution. Exploratory testing is usually performed by the testers, who use their creativity, intuition, or experience to explore the software and discover any defects, risks, or opportunities for improvement. Exploratory testing is more concerned with the behavior, quality, or value of the software, rather than its internal structure or implementation. References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, Chapter 4: Test Techniques, Section 4.3: Structural Testing Techniques, Pages 51-54; Chapter 1: Fundamentals of Testing, Section 1.4: Testing Throughout the Software Development Lifecycle, Pages 11-13; Chapter 3: Static Testing, Section 3.4: Exploratory Testing, Pages 40-41.

Quality Assurance (QA) activities are focused on providing confidence that quality requirements will be fulfilled through planned and systematic processes. These activities are preventive in nature, aimed at ensuring quality is built into the product from the beginning.

Requirements elicitation (A) is part of the requirements engineering process and is concerned with gathering the needs and conditions to meet for a new or altered product.

Defect analysis (B) can be part of QA activities as it involves analyzing defects to prevent them in future development cycles.

Functional Testing (C) and Performance Testing (D) are types of dynamic testing, which are actually Quality Control activities rather than Quality Assurance. They are concerned with the identification of defects in the product, not with the processes to prevent defects.

Since the question asks for an activity that is NOT part of Quality Assurance, options A and B are incorrect because they can be part of QA activities. Between C and D, while both are dynamic testing activities, Functional Testing (C) is more directly related to verifying the functionality against specified requirements, which is more aligned with Quality Control. Therefore, C is the best answer.

An oracle is a mechanism or source that can provide the expected result for a given test input or situation. Sometimes old version of a product can be used as an oracle, if it is assumed that the old version behaves correctly for the test cases that are executed on the new version. This is also known as back-to-back testing. Oracles do not help in reproducing the irreproducible bugs, as they only provide the expected results, not the actual results. Oracles are not derived from the design, but from the requirements or specifications. Oracles cannot be generated automatically using data generators, as data generators only provide test inputs, not test outputs. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 9.

Effort estimate does not depend on the budget of the project, but rather on the scope, complexity, and quality of the software product and the testing activities1. Budget is a constraint that may affect the feasibility and accuracy of the effort estimate, but it is not a factor that determines the effort estimate. Effort estimate is the amount of work required to complete the testing activities, measured in terms of person-hours, person-days, or person-months2.

The other options are correct because:

A. Once the test effort is estimated, resources can be identified and a schedule can be drawn up, as they are interrelated aspects of the test planning process3. Resources are the people, tools, equipment, and facilities needed to perform the testing activities4. Schedule is the time frame and sequence of the testing activities, aligned with the project milestones and deadlines5.

B. Effort estimate can be inaccurate because the quality of the product under tests is not known, as it affects the number and severity of the defects that may be found and the rework that may be needed to fix them6. Quality is the degree to which the software product satisfies the specified requirements and meets the needs and expectations of the users and clients7.

D. Experience based estimation is one of the estimation techniques, which relies on the judgment and expertise of the testers and other project stakeholders to estimate the test effort based on similar projects or tasks done in the past. Experience based estimation can be useful when there is a lack of historical data, formal methods, or detailed information about the software product and the testing activities.

References =

1 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 154

2 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 155

3 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 156

4 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 157

5 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 158

6 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 159

7 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 16

[8] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 160

[9] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 161

One possible risk of introducing test automation is that the selected tool may not be fit-for-purpose. This means that the tool might not meet the specific needs and requirements of the project, leading to inefficiencies and possibly failing to provide the expected benefits. It is crucial to evaluate and select the appropriate tool based on the project's context and objectives. The ISTQB CTFL syllabus highlights the importance of careful tool evaluation and selection to ensure it aligns with the testing goals and the development environment.

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.

Experience based techniques (EBT) are techniques that use the knowledge, intuition and skills of the test engineers to design and execute tests. EBT use tests derived from the test engineers’ previous experience with similar technologies, domains, applications or systems. EBT are not based on the ability of the test engineer to implement various testing techniques, but rather on their personal judgment and creativity. EBT are not done as a second stage of testing, after non-experience-based testing took place, but rather as a complementary or alternative approach to other techniques. EBT require broad and deep knowledge in both testing and the application or technological domain, as this can help the test engineer identify potential risks, scenarios or defects. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 5, page 48-49.

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​​.

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.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Business, development, and testing (C) are the three key perspectives in agile 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 incorrect because the product owner is part of business stakeholders.

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

(D) is incorrect because acceptance testing is a process, not a stakeholder group.

A cross-functional team collaboration ensures well-defined, testable, and feasible user stories.

A test task that usually occurs during test implementation is to make sure the planned test environment is ready to be delivered. The test environment is the hardware and software configuration on which the tests are executed, and it should be as close as possible to the production environment where the software system will operate. The test environment should be planned, prepared, and verified before the test execution, to ensure that the test conditions, the test data, the test tools, and the test interfaces are available and functional. The other options are not test tasks that usually occur during test implementation, but rather test tasks that occur during other test activities, such as:

Find, analyze, and remove the causes of the failures highlighted by the tests: This is a test task that usually occurs during test analysis and design, which is the activity of analyzing the test basis, designing the test cases, and identifying the test data. During this activity, the testers can use techniques such as root cause analysis, defect prevention, or defect analysis, to find, analyze, and remove the causes of the failures highlighted by the previous tests, and to prevent or reduce the occurrence of similar failures in the future tests.

Archive the testware for use in future test projects: This is a test task that usually occurs during test closure, which is the activity of finalizing and reporting the test results, evaluating the test process, and identifying the test improvement actions. During this activity, the testers can archive the testware, which are the test artifacts produced during the testing process, such as the test plan, the test cases, the test data, the test results, the defect reports, etc., for use in future test projects, such as regression testing, maintenance testing, or reuse testing.

Gather the metrics that are used to guide the test project: This is a test task that usually occurs during test monitoring and control, which is the activity of tracking and reviewing the test progress, status, and quality, and taking corrective actions when necessary. During this activity, the testers can gather the metrics, which are the measurements of the testing process, such as the test coverage, the defect density, the test effort, the test duration, etc., that are used to guide the test project, such as planning, estimating, scheduling, reporting, or improving the testing process. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

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, Test Environment, Test Condition, Test Data, Test Tool, Test Interface, Failure, Root Cause Analysis, Defect Prevention, Defect Analysis, Testware, Regression Testing, Maintenance Testing, Reuse Testing, Test Coverage, Defect Density, Test Effort, Test Duration2

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.

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​​.

The IEEE 829 standard is a widely used specification for test documentation, but it is not mandatory or universal. Most test documentation regimes follow this spec to some degree, with changes done to fit a specific situation or organization. The standard does not require any approval from management, marketing or development for any deviation, nor does it depend on the type of project (military or consumer market). The standard also does not guarantee high quality test documentation regimes, as it only provides a general outline and format, not the actual content or quality criteria. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 16.

ATDD stands for Acceptance Test-Driven Development, which is a collaborative approach to software development and testing, in which the acceptance criteria of a user story are defined and automated as executable tests before the implementation of the software system. ATDD tests are usually written in a Given-When-Then format, which describes the preconditions, the actions, and the expected outcomes of a test scenario. ATDD tests are intended to verify that the software system meets the expectations and the needs of the users and the stakeholders, as well as to provide feedback and guidance for the developers and the testers. Based on the given information, the ATDD test that is most likely to be written first is the one that corresponds to option B, which is:

Given the logged-in user is on the Change Password page When the user enters the correct current password, enters a valid new password (different from the last 5 passwords), and presses the Change Password button Then the user receives an email confirming that the password has been successfully changed

This ATDD test is most likely to be written first, because it covers the main functionality and the happy path of the user story, as well as the most important acceptance criterion [a]. It also verifies that the user can change the password with a valid new password that meets the criteria related to the length, the type of characters, and the history of the passwords, as specified in the acceptance criterion [c]. The other options are not likely to be written first, because they either cover less critical or less frequent scenarios, such as entering a wrong current password [d] or an invalid new password [e], or they are not related to the user story or the acceptance criteria at all, such as submitting a purchase order [d]. 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 Lifecycles1

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Acceptance Test-Driven Development, User Story, Acceptance Criterion, Given-When-Then2

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.

According to the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0, the life cycle of a defect typically follows a sequence from its discovery to its closure. In the provided figure, it starts with S0 (New), moves to S1 (Assigned), then to S2 (Resolved), followed by S3 (Verified). If the defect is not fixed, it can be Re-opened (S5) and goes back for verification (S3). Once verified, it is Closed (S4). References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Syllabus, Section 1.4.3, Page 17.

Statement coverage measures the percentage of executable statements that have been exercised by a test suite. Achieving 80% statement coverage means that 80% of the executable code lines have been tested. This metric helps in understanding how much of the code has been covered during testing. However, it does not guarantee branch coverage, variable initialization, or detection of all possible defects. The ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 explains statement coverage as a measure of the extent to which the code has been tested, without implying other types of coverage or testing goals​​.

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.

The statement "Early and frequent feedback helps to avoid requirements misunderstanding" is true. Early feedback from stakeholders, through reviews and other static testing techniques, helps clarify requirements and ensures that any misunderstandings are addressed promptly. This practice aligns with Agile principles and contributes to developing software that meets user needs more accurately.

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.

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