Pass the ISTQB Foundation Level ISTQB-CTFL Questions and answers with CertsForce

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​​.

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

The question is about selecting the correct test values for x based on equivalence partitioning. Equivalence partitioning is a software test design technique that divides the input data of a software unit into partitions of equivalent data from which test cases can be derived. In this case, the given equivalence classes are:

(x \leq -100)

(-100 < x < 100)

(100 \leq x < 1000)

(x \geq 1000)

Option D provides a value from each of these partitions:

For (x \leq -100), it gives -1000.

For (-100 < x < 100), it gives -100 and 100.

For (100 \leq x < 1000), it gives 500.

For (x \geq 1000), it gives 1500.

So, option D covers all four given equivalence classes with appropriate values.

References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 documents available at ISTQB and ASTQB.

1: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 38

2: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 39

: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 40

Exploratory testing is an experience-based test technique in which testers dynamically design and execute tests based on their knowledge, intuition, and learning of the software system, without following predefined test scripts or test cases. Exploratory testing can be conducted following a session-based approach, which is a structured way of managing and measuring exploratory testing. In a session-based approach, the testers perform uninterrupted test sessions, usually lasting between 60 and 120 minutes, with a specific charter or goal, and document the issues detected, the test coverage achieved, and the time spent in session sheets. Session sheets are records of the test activities, results, and observations during a test session, which can be used for reporting, debriefing, and learning purposes. The other statements are false, because:

Exploratory testing is not a test technique in which testers explore the requirements specification to detect non testable requirements, but rather a test technique in which testers explore the software system to detect functional and non-functional defects, as well as to learn new information, risks, or opportunities. Non testable requirements are requirements that are ambiguous, incomplete, inconsistent, or not verifiable, which can affect the quality and effectiveness of the testing process. Non testable requirements can be detected by applying static testing techniques, such as reviews or inspections, to the requirements specification, before the software system is developed or tested.

Exploratory testing is not a test technique used by testers during informal code reviews to find defects by exploring the source code, but rather a test technique used by testers during dynamic testing to find defects by exploring the behavior and performance of the software system, without examining the source code. Informal code reviews are static testing techniques, in which the source code is analyzed by one or more reviewers, without following a formal process or using a checklist, to identify defects, violations, or improvements. Informal code reviews are usually performed by developers or peers, not by testers.

In exploratory testing, testers usually do not produce scripted tests and establish bidirectional traceability between these tests and the items of the test basis, but rather produce unscripted tests and adapt them based on the feedback and the findings of the testing process. Scripted tests are tests that are designed anddocumented in advance, with predefined inputs, outputs, and expected results, and are executed according to a test plan or a test procedure. Bidirectional traceability is the ability to trace both forward and backward the relationships between the items of the test basis, such as the requirements, the design, the risks, etc., and the test artifacts, such as the test cases, the test results, the defects, etc. Scripted tests and bidirectional traceability are usually associated with more formal and structured testing approaches, such as specification-based or structure-based test techniques, not with exploratory testing. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.3, Experience-based Test Design Techniques1

ISTQB® Glossary of TestingTerms v4.0, Exploratory Testing, Session-based Testing, Session Sheet, Non Testable Requirement, Static Testing, Informal Review, Dynamic Testing, Scripted Testing, Bidirectional Traceability2

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 performanceand 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​​.

You should choose a test technique because you need to match the way you test to the content of the product under test. A test technique is a method or process for deriving and selecting test cases based on some criteria or rules. Different test techniques are suitable for different types of software products, depending on their characteristics, functionalities, requirements, specifications, risks, etc. Choosing a test technique helps to ensure that the test cases are relevant, effective, and efficient for the product under test. The other options are not correct reasons to choose a test technique. Time constraints are not a factor for choosing a test technique, but rather for prioritizing or optimizing testing activities. Covering the full scope of the product’s functionality is not a guarantee of choosing a test technique, but rather a goal of testing. Choosing a test technique is not a common practice in software testing, but rather a professional skill and responsibility. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 31.

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

Statements II, III and V are true about test reports. Test reports are documents that provide information on the results and status of testing activities for a given period or phase. Test reports should give stakeholders information as basis for decisions, such as whether to release the software product, whether to continue testing, whether to change the scope or priorities of testing, etc. Test reports should summarize what happened through a period of testing, such as what test cases were executed, what defects were found, what risks were identified, what issues were encountered, what achievements were made, etc. Test reports should include information about remaining risks, such as what defects are still open, what test cases are still pending, what functionalities are still untested, what uncertainties are still unresolved, etc. Statements I and IV are not true about test reports. Test reports do not need to be approved by the test team, the development team, or the customer, unless it is specified by the test policy or the test plan. Test reports only need to be reviewed and verified by the test leader or the test manager before being distributed to the intended recipients. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 141.

In formal reviews, the scribe's role is to collate potential defects and other findings during the review process. This position is crucial as it ensures all observations and defects are recordedaccurately, facilitating efficient analysis and resolution of issues identified during the review.References:ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 3.2.4 "Roles and Responsibilities in a Formal Review".