Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Assuming that testers could check the ease of changing the currency exchange system then it would be done by maintainability testing rather than maintenance testing, so this is not a trigger for maintenance testing
b) Is correct. A system modification (such as a fix or enhancement) is an example of a trigger for maintenance testing. The removal of the refund option of the currency exchange system was a fix that would lead to maintenance testing
c) Is not correct. If the agile team has started developing a user story that adds a new customer loyalty feature to the currency exchange system, then this will result in them testing the new feature, and then they would perform regression testing. No maintenance testing is required in this situation
d) Is not correct. Reconfiguration of the currency exchange system to support both the local language and English currency transactions is not a system modification, a change to the operational environment, or a system retirement, which are the three triggers for maintenance testing

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. Performing only black-box testing does not provide a measure of actual code coverage. White-box coverage measures provide an objective measurement of coverage and provide the necessary information to allow additional tests to be generated to increase this coverage, and subsequently increase confidence in the code
b) Is not correct. This statement is correct, but it has nothing to do with black-box testing
c) Is not correct. In general there are no subsumes relationships between white-box and black-box techniques
d) Is not correct. White-box techniques are used to design tests based on the test object itself, while black-box techniques are used to design tests based on the specification. Therefore, there is no relation between coverage items derived from these two types of techniques

Explanation / Rationale

There are five columns in the decision table. Each test case covers one of them.

TC1 and TC2 both cover Rule 4
TC3 and TC4 both cover Rule 2
TC5 covers Rule 5

So, these five test cases cover three out of five columns, achieving a coverage of (3/5)*100% = 60%. Therefore, option b) is the CORRECT option.
Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is correct
c) Is not correct
d) Is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The test automation approach is defined by testers with the help of developers and business representatives
b) Is not correct. The test strategy is decided in collaboration with the developers
c) Is not correct. Testers, developers, and business representatives are part of the whole team approach
d) Is correct. Testers will work closely with business representatives to ensure that the desired quality levels are achieved. This includes supporting and collaborating with them to help them create suitable acceptance tests

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The feedback is from stakeholders (e.g., business representative, end user), not from developers, so this feedback is not likely to inform managers which developers are more or less productive
b) Is not correct. Early and frequent feedback from stakeholders is not used by project managers to prioritize how they interact with the different stakeholders
c) Is correct. Obtaining feedback from stakeholders early and often in the software development process can be highly beneficial as it facilitates early communication of potential quality issues, can prevent misunderstandings about requirements, and ensures that any changes in stakeholder requirements are understood and implemented sooner
d) Is not correct. Early and frequent feedback can prevent the development of a product that does not meet stakeholder needs, and results in costly rework and missed deadlines, so, ideally there should be no delay. Also, the feedback is from stakeholders (not to them), which includes the end users, so the end users providing feedback will not aid the end users’ understanding

Explanation / Rationale

Risk assessment can use a quantitative or qualitative approach, or a mix of them. In the quantitative approach the risk level is calculated as the multiplication of risk likelihood and risk impact. So, Risk level = Risk likelihood * Risk impact
Then, Risk impact = Risk level / Risk likelihood.
In our case, Risk impact = $1,000 / 50% = $1,000 / 0.5 = $2,000.
Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is correct
c) Is not correct
d) Is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

The testware under consideration is a test charter

Test charters are the output from test design
Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is not correct
c) Is not correct
d) Is correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Traceability is the relationship between two or more work products, not between different versions of the same work product
b) Is not correct. Maintenance testing is about testing changes; it is not related closely to versioning
c) Is correct. To support testing, configuration management may involve the version control of all test items
d) Is not correct. Requirements engineering is the elicitation, documentation, and management of requirements; it is not closely related to test script versioning

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. QA concentrates on process improvement and implementation, using a preventive approach to avoid errors and defects, while testing is a form of QC that is used to detect defects
b) Is correct. QC aims to achieve appropriate levels of quality by focusing on identifying and correcting product defects. Testing is a significant part of QC and helps to uncover these defects
c) Is not correct. Although testing is a significant part of QC and helps to uncover defects, other (non-testing) techniques utilized in QC include formal methods like model checking and proof of correctness, as well as simulation and prototyping
d) Is not correct. QA concentrates on process improvement and implementation, using a preventive approach to avoid errors and defects, while testing is a form of QC that is used to detect defects

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The organization’s marketing team is unlikely to perform much testing (although in some organizations they may be involved with acceptance testing), so their average level of experience (most of which would be in marketing) is not likely to impact how testing is performed for a given test object
b) Is not correct. The level of knowledge of users that a new system is being built for them is unlikely to affect how testing is performed. Any user involvement that could affect how testing is performed is more likely to be as a result of decisions made by the testers, customer and project manager
c) Is correct. The number of years’ experience of the members of the performance testing team will help to determine the capabilities and knowledge (e.g., of different tools and defect types) that the team members will apply when they are testing
d) Is not correct. The organizational structure of the different end users (who may be varied) will change between users. So, it may not even be known when the application is being tested, and the end user’s organizational structure can thus have little effect on how the testing is performed

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Dynamic testing does cause failures (from which defects can then be located and fixed). However, debugging is concerned with locating defects and fixing these defects. Therefore, debugging does not fix failures
b) Is not correct. Both testing and debugging contribute to improving the quality of the test object, so should really both be considered positively. Debugging is generally considered to be a positive activity as it is fixing something. Dynamic testing does involve intentionally causing the test object to fail, which is why some people consider it a negative activity, but that is a very narrow view (and not one typically held by testers). Both positive and negative test cases are possible. Positive test cases check that the test object correctly performs what it is supposed to do, while negative testing checks that the test object does not do what it is not supposed to do
c) Is correct. Testing determines that defects exist either directly through observation of the defect in reviews (or by a tool in static analysis), or indirectly by causing a failure in dynamic testing. Debugging is a separate activity from testing (normally performed by developers) and is concerned with locating defects (only for dynamic testing) and fixing the defects
d) Is not correct. The causes of defects are typically human errors. Testing finds defects either directly through static testing, or indirectly by causing failures in dynamic testing, and debugging fixes defects. So, testing does not find the cause of defects and debugging does not fix the causes of defects

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The expected result is “the application should accept the provided input and create the user”. The actual result is “The application hangs up after entering “Test input. $ä””.
b) Is not correct. There is a reference to the test case and to the related requirement and it states that the defect is rejected. Also, the defect status would not be very helpful for the developers
c) Is correct. We do not know in which test environment the anomaly was detected, and we also do not know which application (and its version) is affected
d) Is not correct. The defect report states that the anomaly is urgent, that it is a global issue (i.e., many, if not all, test administration accounts are affected) and states the impact is high for business stakeholders

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Retrospectives are more useful for identifying improvement opportunities and have little importance for clients
b) Is not correct. Business representatives are not giving feedback about the product itself. Therefore, there is no financial gain to the organization
c) Is correct. Regularly conducted retrospectives, when appropriate follow up activities occur, are critical to continual improvement of development and testing
d) Is not correct. Courage and respect are values of Extreme Programming and are not closely related to retrospectives

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The root cause is the distraction that the programmer experienced while programming
b) Is not correct. Accepting invalid inputs is a failure
c) Is not correct. The error is the mistaken thinking that resulted in putting the defect in the code
d) Is correct. The problem in the code is a defect

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. When a system is retired, this can require testing of data migration, which is a form of maintenance testing
b) Is not correct. Regression testing verifies whether a fix accidentally affected the behavior of other parts of the code, but now we are talking about data migration to a new system
c) Is not correct. Component testing focuses on individual hardware or software components, not on data migration
d) Is not correct. Integration testing focuses on interactions between components and/or systems, not on data migration

Explanation / Rationale

Error guessing is about anticipating the errors, defects and failures based on the tester’s knowledge.
a) Is not correct. This is an example of anticipating the developer’s error
b) Is not correct. This is an example of anticipating the defect
c) Is correct. This is an example of a potential root cause of a defect, which is neither an error, defect nor failure, and difficult for the tester to anticipate
d) Is not correct. This is an example of anticipating a failure, perhaps based on experience of previous systems in this application domain

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. It is more often used in behavior-driven development (BDD)
b) Is not correct. It is the description of test-driven development (TDD)
c) Is correct. In acceptance test-driven development (ATDD) tests are written from acceptance criteria as part of the design process
d) Is not correct. It is used in BDD

Explanation / Rationale

There are two equivalence partitions that are not yet covered, which correspond to “student discount” and “pensioner discount”.
a) Is not correct. CY – BY = 64, so these inputs correspond to the already covered “no discount” partition
b) Is correct. CY – BY = 65, so these inputs correspond to a partition that is not yet covered (“pensioner discount”)
c) Is not correct. CY – BY = –65, so these inputs correspond to the already covered “error message” partition
d) Is not correct. CY – BY = 18, so these inputs correspond to the already covered “no discount” partition
e) Is correct. CY – BY = 0, so these inputs correspond to a partition that is not yet covered (“student discount”)

Explanation / Rationale

“test” and “error” transitions cannot occur in one test case.
Neither can both “done” transitions.
This means we need at least three test cases to achieve transition coverage. For example:

TC1: test, done
TC2: run, error, done
TC3: run, pause, resume, pause, done

Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is not correct
c) Is not correct
d) Is correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. Test-Driven Development (TDD) is a well-known example of a test-first approach to development
b) Is not correct. Coverage-Driven Development is not a correct example of a test-first approach to development
c) Is not correct. Quality-Driven Development is not a correct example of a test-first approach to development
d) Is not correct. Feature-Driven Development is not an example of a test-first approach to development, but is, instead, an agile software development methodology based around delivering features (as opposed to user stories in Scrum)

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. When a user reports a software failure, thanks to the unique identification of commits, it is possible to reassemble the files from the software version which was used by the user (as well as the corresponding versions of the test scripts) and thus reproduce the failure and locate the defect faster
b) Is not correct. If a change to the test environment causes unexpected issues during testing, configuration management allows testers to roll back to a previous version of the environment. This ensures that testing can continue without being affected by the change
c) Is not correct. Configuration management ensures that all identified documentation (e.g., requirement specifications) and software items are referenced unambiguously in test documentation (e.g., test plans)
d) Is correct. This is ensured by the defect management, not configuration management process

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Component testing (also called unit testing) involves testing individual components in isolation and is mostly verification against a specification, rather than validation against user needs. However, this testing is not normally performed by testers, as developers usually carry out this testing in their development environment
b) Is not correct. Component integration testing involves testing the interfaces and interactions between components and is mostly verification against a specification, rather than validation against user needs. However, this testing is not normally performed by testers, as developers usually carry out this testing
c) Is not correct. System integration testing examines the interfaces with other systems and external services and is mostly verification against a specification, rather than validation against user needs. This type of testing is also most often performed by testers
d) Is correct. Acceptance testing focuses on validating that the system meets the user's business needs and is ready for deployment. Ideally, this testing is carried out by the end users

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The detection of additional high-severity defects would be a benefit of test automation, rather than a risk
b) Is not correct. The provision of measures that are too complicated for humans to derive themselves is normally considered to be a benefit of test automation
c) Is correct. If the test automation is incompatible with the development platform, then it will not be able to integrate them, and, for instance, pass test inputs to the test object and receive test results from the test object
d) Is not correct. Substantially reduced test execution times would normally be considered a benefit that is provided by test automation

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Risk monitoring is part of risk control, not risk analysis
b) Is not correct. Risk identification itself does not allow us to implement risk mitigation activities. The mitigating actions are defined during the risk control phase
c) Is correct. This is an example of how risk analysis influences the thoroughness and scope of testing
d) Is not correct. Coverage items are derived using test techniques, not through risk analysis

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Validating that documented requirements are met is incorrect as validation is concerned with meeting user requirements and expectations, while verification is concerned with meeting specified requirements, so this would be correct if we replaced ‘validating’ with ‘verifying’
b) Is correct. Causing failures and identifying defects is probably the most common objective of dynamic testing
c) Is not correct. Initiating errors and identifying root causes is incorrect because testers do not initiate errors, they try to cause failures. Errors are typically made by developers (and cannot really be initiated) and result in defects, which testers attempt to identify either directly through static testing or indirectly through failures with dynamic testing. Identifying root causes is useful but is part of debugging, which is a separate activity to testing
d) Is not correct. Verifying the test object meets user expectations is incorrect as verification is concerned with checking specified (documented) requirements are met, while validation is concerned with meeting user requirements and expectations, so this would be correct if we replaced ‘verifying’ with ‘validating’

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Acceptance criteria are the conditions used to decide whether the user story is ready. They cannot show work progress
b) Is not correct. Defect reports inform about the defects. They do not show work progress
c) Is not correct. Test completion report can be created after the iteration is finished, so it will not show the progress continuously within an iteration
d) Is correct. Burndown charts are a graphical representation of work left to do versus time remaining. They are updated daily, so they can continuously show the work progress

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. This principle means that if the same tests are repeated over and over again, eventually these tests no longer find any new defects. This is probably why the tests all passed in this release as well
b) Is not correct. This principle says about the mistaken belief that just finding and fixing a large number of defects will ensure the success of a system
c) Is not correct. This principle says that a small number of components usually contain most of the defects
d) Is not correct. This principle states that testing all combinations of inputs and preconditions is not feasible

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. This test case is related to acceptance criteria 2 and 3, because we check if we can set price range (acceptance criterion 2) and if the results update dynamically after adjusting the price range filter (acceptance criterion 3)
b) Is not correct. This test case is not related to any of the acceptance criteria. It checks if the filter dynamically sets the default minimum and maximum price range, and not that a customer can do it
c) Is not correct. This test case is not related to any of the acceptance criteria. It checks the currency exchange feature, which is not discussed in this user story
d) Is not correct. This test case is not related to any of the acceptance criteria. It checks the application’s compatibility with different browsers, which is not discussed in this user story

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Regression tests increase in number as the project progresses, as new regression tests are typically required as changes are made to the system. Similarly, the number of confirmation tests also typically increases as the project progresses as new confirmation tests are needed for each fix made to a system
b) Is not correct. It is the other way round. Confirmation tests are created and run when the test object is fixed, and regression tests are (ideally) run whenever the test object is enhanced (changed)
c) Is not correct. Confirmation testing verifies that a defect has been fixed correctly and so is concerned with testing changes to the test object. However, regression testing ensures that changes (including changes to the operational environment) do not have negative effects on unchanged software and so does not check that the operational environment remains unchanged
d) Is correct. Regression testing ensures that changes do not have negative effects on unchanged software. Confirmation testing verifies that a defect has been fixed – and so is concerned with changed code

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Testing quadrants have nothing to do with describing the relationships between test levels
b) Is not correct. Testing quadrants cannot help in assessing any type of coverage
c) Is correct. Testing quadrants allow managers and other stakeholders to understand the relationships between test types, the activities they support (team support or product critique), and the viewpoint they are focused on (business- or technology-facing)
d) Is not correct. Testing quadrants is not a psychological model

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The test case is related to viewing previous orders in the order history
b) Is not correct. The test case is related to viewing previous orders
c) Is not correct. The test case is related to viewing previous orders in the order history
d) Is correct. The test case is related to the registration process, which is not discussed in the user story. The user story is about viewing previous orders

Explanation / Rationale

Some defect types that can only be detected by static testing, such as unreachable code, design patterns not implemented as desired and defects in non-executable work products. Some defect types that can be found by both static testing and dynamic testing, such as a programming defect that can be observed by a reviewer in a code review and which causes an observable failure during dynamic testing. And some defect types that can only be detected by dynamic testing, such as performance issues or memory issues that can only be observed when executing the code or system.

Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is not correct
c) Is correct
d) Is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Performing the impact analysis will not give information about completeness of tests. Analyzing the impact analysis of changes will help to select the right test cases for execution
b) Is not correct. Traceability does not give information about the estimated level of residual risk if the test cases are not traced back to risks
c) Is correct. Performing the impact analysis of the changes helps in selecting the test cases for the regression test
d) Is not correct. Analyzing the traceability between the test basis, test objects and test cases does not help in selecting test data to achieve the assumed coverage of the test object. Selecting test data is more related to test analysis and test implementation, not traceability

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Test progress reports are mostly used during test monitoring and control, and test completion, not during test design
b) Is correct. A test completion report is prepared during test completion, when a project, test level, or test type is complete and when, ideally, its exit criteria have been met. This report uses information from test progress reports and other data
c) Is not correct. Test progress reports are mostly used during test monitoring and control, and test completion, not during test analysis
d) Is not correct. Test progress reports are most used during test monitoring and control, and test completion, not during test planning

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. It is often possible to use dynamic testing to cause a test object to fail in ways that could never be achieved by the users, such as by using fault injection. However, if the failure can never occur with real end users, then identifying it is not especially valuable as testing is ultimately aimed at improving the work product for the end users. Spending time testing for failures that cannot occur with real users is not an efficient use of a tester’s time
b) Is not correct. Static testing in the form of static analysis is used by developers to identify defects in their program code earlier than can be achieved through dynamic testing. Note, however, that static testing (and static analysis) is used to detect defects, not failures, which are found by dynamic testing. Thus it is the use of the term ‘failures’ that makes this an incorrect option
c) Is not correct. Static analysis directly detects anomalies in code, which may be defects, and this is normally for the developer, not the customer. The provision of evidence for release by the use of static analysis of elements that provide no output is nonsense
d) Is correct. Reviews are a form of static testing that can be applied from the very start of the software development lifecycle and are used to find defects that can be removed before subsequent development activities waste effort on faulty requirements. If the defects are not detected and removed early on, then when the defect is found derived work products, such as the design and code, will need to be changed as they were based on faulty requirements

Explanation / Rationale

The ‘exhaustive testing is impossible’ principle is concerned with the fact that it is not feasible to test every possible variation of test inputs in all different circumstances, except in trivial cases. Instead, testing utilizes test techniques, test case prioritization, and risk-based testing to sample from the set of possibilities and focus testing efforts.
a) Is not correct. The principle states that it is not feasible to test everything except in trivial cases. Testing everything would require testing every possible variation of test inputs in all different circumstances, which is generally infeasible as there will be a practically infinite number. Testing every possible specified output will not address this problem as the relationship between inputs and specified outputs can be different for each test object. Sometimes there may be a practically infinite number of possible specified outputs (e.g., when there are several variables representing real numbers), whereas at other times there may be just two specified outputs, such as with a single variable that can be either true or false
b) Is not correct. The principle states that it is not feasible to test every possible variation of test inputs in all different circumstances. This is because for non-trivial systems there is a practically infinite number. Therefore, in practice, documenting all possible test input variations would be impractical as it would take an infinite length of time
c) Is not correct. Starting testing as early as possible with reviews and other static testing approaches will not address the problem of there being too many possible test cases. The ‘early testing saves time and money’ principle is concerned with fixing defects early on to prevent the occurrence of subsequent defects in derived work products, thereby reducing costs and the likelihood of failures
d) Is correct. The use of equivalence partitioning and boundary value analysis to generate test cases is one way to address the principle as these test techniques provide a systematic way to derive a finite subset of all possible test cases

Explanation / Rationale

The ‘absence-of-defects fallacy’ is concerned with the idea that ensuring correctness in accordance with the requirements (i.e., verifying the absence of implementation defects) does not guarantee user satisfaction with the system. To address this it is also necessary to validate that the system meets users' needs and expectations, fulfills business objectives, and outperforms competing systems.
a) Is not correct. The ‘testing shows the presence, not the absence of defects’ principle explains that while testing can detect the existence of defects in the test object, it is not possible to demonstrate that there are no defects and, therefore, guarantee its correctness. Therefore, explaining that it is not possible for testing to show the absence of defects would partially address this principle, not the ‘absence-of-defects’ fallacy
b) Is correct. By supporting the end user to perform acceptance testing it should be possible to validate that the system meets users' needs and expectations
c) Is not correct. It is not possible to ensure that no implementation defects remain in the delivered system as the ‘testing shows the presence, not the absence of defects’ principle explains that while testing can detect the existence of defects in the test object, it is not possible to demonstrate that there are no defects and, therefore, guarantee its correctness
d) Is not correct. Modifying tests that cause no failures to ensure few defects remain is one way to address the ‘tests wear out’ principle. This principle is concerned with the idea that repeating identical tests on unaltered code is unlikely to uncover novel defects and therefore, modifying tests may be essential. This will not validate that the system meets users' needs and expectations

Explanation / Rationale

The five listed descriptions and the corresponding review process activities are:

1. This describes part of the ‘communication and analysis’ activity
2. This describes part of the ‘fixing and reporting’ activity
3. This describes part of the ‘individual review’ activity
4. This describes part of the ‘planning’ activity
5. This describes part of the ‘review initiation’ activity

The generic review process from ISO/IEC 20246, which is outlined in the syllabus, comprises the following activities in this logical order:

• Planning (4)
• Review initiation (5)
• Individual review (3)
• Communication and analysis (1)
• Fixing and reporting (2)

Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is correct. The correct sequence of activities is: 4 – 5 – 3 – 1 – 2
c) Is not correct
d) Is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Planning poker can estimate effort for a user story that is already written. It does not help in understanding what should be delivered
b) Is not correct. Reviews are not a collaborative user story writing practice
c) Is not correct. Iteration planning is a project-related practice, used to plan the work, not to understand what needs to be delivered
d) Is correct. Conversation explains how the software will be used and often allows the team to define meaningful acceptance criteria, thus obtaining a shared vision of what should be delivered

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Quality control applies to all development activities, meaning that every software development activity has a corresponding test activity. However, here we are attempting to equate test levels with development levels, and, although we know what is meant by ‘test levels’, there is no common understanding of the term ‘ development level’
b) Is not correct. Every software development activity has a corresponding test activity; however test objectives are quite different. For instance, there might be a test objective of ensuring that a test object adheres to a contractual requirement that a certain type of testing must be performed before delivery. In this case there is no reason for there to be a corresponding development objective
c) Is not correct. Quality control applies to all development activities, meaning that every software development activity has a corresponding test activity. However, the same symmetry does not apply to testing and user activities. For instance, for some systems it is difficult to even identify the end users. Also, some test activities are focused on developers (e.g., testing for ease of maintainability), which has no user aspect to it
d) Is correct. Quality control applies to all development activities, meaning that every software development activity has a corresponding test activity