Pass the BCS ISTQB Certified Tester CTFL4 Questions and answers with CertsForce

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

References:ISTQB CTFL Syllabus, Section on Agile methodologies and estimation techniques.

In software testing, risks are categorized into product risks and project risks. Product risks are associated with the potential of a product to fail in meeting its quality criteria. Project risks are related to potential issues that could affect the project's ability to deliver a product.

[i] is a project risk because it concerns the availability and adequacy of hardware resources for performance testing.

[ii] is a product risk because it pertains to a security and functionality issue within the web application.

[iii] is a project risk because it involves the availability of necessary requirements documentation for the testing process.

[iv] is a product risk because it relates to the system's functionality and data integrity after a failure.

Thus, statement A correctly classifies [ii] and [iv] as product risks and [i] and [iii] as project risks​​.

This answer is correct because a typical objective of testing is to ensure that a software has been tested using a combination of test techniques, such as black-box, white-box, or experience-based techniques, that are appropriate for the test objectives, test levels, and test types. Testing using a combination of test techniques can increase the effectiveness and efficiency of testing, as different techniques can target different aspects of the software quality, such as functionality, usability, performance, security, reliability, etc. Testing using a combination of test techniques can also reduce the risk of missing defects that could be detected by one technique but not by another. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.3.1.1, Section 2.3.2

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

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

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.

The principle of early testing is applicable to all recognized software development models, including sequential, iterative, and incremental models. Starting test activities early in the lifecycle helps in identifying and addressing defects as soon as possible, which can save time and costs by preventing defects from propagating to later stages of development. This proactive approach enhances the overall quality and efficiency of the software development process.Reference:ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 1.3

During the review planning stage, key decisions are made, including the selection of standards and procedures to be followed during the review. This planning phase ensures that the review process is structured and adheres to agreed-upon standards, which can come from industry standards such as ISO/IEC/IEEE 29119-3. The ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 emphasizes the importance of review planning in establishing the framework and guidelines for the review process​​.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:Black-box testing techniques focus ontesting the functionality of the software without knowledge of its internal workings(D). They derive test cases fromspecifications, requirements, or expected behavior.Option Adescribes exploratory testing,Bcontradicts the definition by focusing on implementation, andCincorrectly includes "implied behavior," which is not a core characteristic of black-box testing.

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