Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Testers should review work products as soon as drafts are available to enable early testing as part of a shift-left approach. If they waited until the next development phase, then unnecessary development (and test) work could be started on unreviewed, flawed work products
b) Is correct. Testers should review work products as soon as drafts are available to enable early testing as part of a shift-left approach
c) Is not correct. Testers typically review work products that form the test basis as part of test analysis, not before test analysis and design
d) Is not correct. Testers should review work products as soon as drafts are available to enable early testing as part of a shift-left approach. Waiting until they are published means that any defects that could be found by tester review will be in the published document

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. A member without a missed deadline can get a discount and a gift T-Shirt after 15 bicycle rentals
b) Is not correct. A member without a missed deadline can get a discount but no gift T-Shirt until they rented a bicycle 15 times
c) Is not correct. Non-members cannot get a discount, even if they did not miss a deadline yet
d) Is correct. No discount as a non-member that has also missed a deadline, but only members can receive a gift T-Shirt. Hence, the action is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. It is important that testers are involved from the beginning of the software development lifecycle (SDLC). It will increase understanding of design decisions and will detect defects early.
b) Is not correct. Both developers and testers will have more understanding of each other's work products and how to test the code
c) Is not correct. End users will not help the testers in increasing the quality of defect reports; also, users usually do not participate in low-level testing levels like integration testing
d) Is not correct. Being certified does not automatically mean that the tester will be better in test design

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. A line with a defect, when executed, does not have to cause a failure. For example, a line x := y / z will cause a failure only when z equals 0
b) Is not correct. 100% statement coverage does not guarantee 100% branch coverage. For example, a test case with x=0 for the code

1. IF (x=0) THEN
2. A;
3. ENDIF

achieves 100% statement coverage but does not cover the branch from 1 to 3
c) Is correct. 100% statement coverage means that each executable statement was executed at least once
d) Is not correct. The removed test case may provide coverage of some statements that are not covered by either of the other two test cases, in which case the remaining two test cases together will not achieve 100% statement coverage

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. Checking that the sort function puts the elements of the list or array in ascending order is evaluating the functional correctness of the sort function, which is part of functional testing
b) Is not correct. Assessing whether the sort function meets its non-functional requirement to complete within one second is part of testing its performance efficiency, which is part of non-functional testing
c) Is not correct. Evaluating the ease with which the sort function can be modified from sorting ascending to sorting descending is testing its modifiability, a form of non-functional maintainability testing, which is part of non-functional testing
d) Is not correct. Assessing that the sort function still functions correctly when moved from a 32-bit to a 64-bit architecture is testing its adaptability, a form of portability testing, which is part of non-functional testing

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

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. Risk impact and risk likelihood are independent
b) Is not correct. Risk impact and risk likelihood are independent
c) Is correct. Risk impact and risk likelihood are independent
d) Is not correct. We need both factors to calculate risk level

Explanation / Rationale

Test cases TC1, TC2, TC3 and TC4 cover, respectively, rules R2, R3, R7 and R6 in the decision table.
a) Is correct. The conditions “66-year-old”, “unregistered” and “no experience” match rule R4, which is not covered by the existing test cases, so after adding this test case, the decision table coverage will increase
b) Is not correct. The conditions “55-year-old”, “unregistered” and “2 years of experience” match rule R2, already covered by TC1. So adding this test case will not increase the coverage
c) Is not correct. The conditions “19-year-old”, “registered” and “5 years of experience” match rule R6, already covered by TC4. So adding this test case will not increase the coverage
d) Is not correct. The existing test cases cover only 4 out of 7 columns of the decision table. The coverage can be increased by adding test cases that cover yet uncovered columns, that is, R1, R4 and R5

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The fact that the requirement about the system’s performance comes directly from the client and that the performance is important from the business point of view (i.e., high priority) does not make these tests functional, because they do not check “what” the system does, but “how” (i.e., how fast the orders are processed)
b) Is correct. This is an example of performance testing, a type of non-functional testing
c) Is not correct. From the scenario we do not know if interacting with the user interface is a part of the test conditions. But even if we did, the main test objective of these tests is to check the performance, not the usability
d) Is not correct. We do not need to know the internal structure of the code to perform the performance testing. One can execute performance efficiency tests without structural knowledge

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Finding and fixing defects in the test object is not a typical test objective as although identifying defects is an objective of testing, fixing defects is not a testing activity
b) Is not correct. Maintaining effective communications with developers is not a typical test objective as although it is useful in achieving other objectives of testing, such as providing stakeholders with information that enables them to make informed decisions, it is not a primary reason for performing testing
c) Is not correct. Validating that legal requirements have been met is not a typical test objective because validation is concerned with checking whether the system meets users’ and other stakeholders’ needs in its operational environment. Checking that legal requirements have been met is a form of verification
d) Is correct. Building confidence in the quality of the test object is achieved by executing tests that pass

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. In the whole-team approach, testers play a vital role by sharing their testing expertise with the team and guiding product development. They collaborate with other team members to achieve the desired quality levels and work with business representatives to create acceptance tests. Testers also partner with developers to determine the optimal test strategy and automation approaches
b) Is correct. By leveraging the diverse skill sets of each team member most effectively, the whole-team approach fosters superior team dynamics, promotes robust communication and collaboration, and generates a synergistic effect that benefits the entire project
c) Is not correct. The whole-team approach allows any team member with the requisite skills and knowledge to undertake any task, thus specialist team members are not an advantage of this approach
d) Is not correct. There is no specific guidance on the optimum size of teams using the whole-team approach, and there is no suggestion that larger teams are better

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. DevOps generally increases the visibility of non-functional quality characteristics, such as performance and reliability
b) Is not correct. Automated processes like continuous integration/continuous delivery (CI/CD) used in DevOps facilitate stable test environments
c) Is not correct. Automated processes like CI/CD used in DevOps generally reduce the need for manual testing
d) Is correct. DevOps implementation can pose several risks and challenges, including the need to define and set up the delivery pipeline, introduce and maintain CI/CD tools, and establish and maintain test automation

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. The primary benefit of independence in testing is that testers are more likely to identify different types of failures and defects compared to developers, due to their varied backgrounds, technical viewpoints, and potential biases, including cognitive bias. However, the main disadvantage of independence in testing is that testers may become isolated from the development team, leading to communication problems, a lack of collaboration, and potentially an adversarial relationship, with testers being blamed for delays and bottlenecks in the release process
b) Is not correct. A developer’s familiarity with the code does not mean that they rarely find defects in it, instead this familiarity means they can efficiently find many defects in their own code. And, rather than developers and testers having a shared background, developers having a different background to testers is normally cited as the reason that testers and developers find different kinds of defects
c) Is not correct. Testing can be conducted at different levels of independence, ranging from no independence for the author to very high independence for testers from outside the organization. In most projects, multiple levels of independence are utilized, with developers performing component and component integration testing, the test team performing system and system integration testing, and business representatives performing acceptance testing. So, testers can be in the developer’s team and do not need to come from outside the organization. Knowledge of the application domain will change from case-to-case and is not dependent on the level of independence
d) Is not correct. Testing can be conducted at different levels of independence, ranging from no independence for the author to very high independence for testers from outside the organization, with testers from outside the developer’s team generally more independent than testers from within the team. However, there is more reason to believe that testers from outside the team are likely to be more isolated from the developers and so are more likely to be blamed for delays in product release

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. Exploratory testing uses test charters, not a list of possible defects/failures. Although exploratory testing can incorporate the use of other test techniques, in this case fault attack is the most likely option
b) Is correct. This is a list of possible failures. Fault attacks are a methodical approach to the implementation of error guessing and require the tester to create or acquire a list of possible errors, defects and failures, and to design tests that will identify defects associated with the errors, expose the defects, or cause the failures
c) Is not correct. The tester is using a checklist of items to support their testing. Both error guessing and checklist-based testing use such lists, however, the list here is of possible failures, not test conditions, and so the MOST PROBABLE test technique is fault attack, which focuses on errors, defects and failures
d) Is not correct. BVA is based on an analysis of boundary values of equivalence partitions. The above list does not mention equivalence partitions or their boundaries

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

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

a) Is not correct. We want to check that Special users have the rights of Regular users, so we need to test access rights for a Special user, not for a Regular user
b) Is not correct. We want to check that Special users have the rights of Regular users, so we need to test access rights for a Special user, not for a Regular user
c) Is not correct. There is no floor 5 described in the acceptance criteria. The test cases should not extend the scope of the user story. But even if we would like to perform negative testing, this test is not directly related to AC3
d) Is correct. This way we can check if a Special user can access floors which are accessible to a Regular user

Explanation / Rationale

Considering the attributes:

• Specified for walkthroughs, technical reviews, and inspections; thus, the reviews being performed cannot be informal reviews
• The purpose of evaluating quality is one of the most important objectives of a walkthrough
• This is not allowed for inspections and is typically not done in technical reviews. A moderator is needed in walkthroughs and is allowed for informal reviews
• All types of reviews can include individual preparation (even informal reviews)
• All types of reviews can produce a review report, although informal reviews do not require documentation

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

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. Since 100% statement coverage is achieved, every statement, including the ones with defects, must have been executed and evaluated at least once
b) Is not correct. Coverage depends on what is tested, not on the number of test cases. For example, for code “if (x==0) y=1”, one test case (x=0) achieves 100% statement coverage, but two test cases (x=1) and (x=2) together achieve only 50% statement coverage
c) Is not correct. If there is a loop in the code there may be an infinite number of possible paths, so it is not possible to execute all the possible paths in the code
d) Is not correct. Exhaustive testing is not possible (see the seven testing principles section in the syllabus). For example, for code “input x; print x” any single test with arbitrary x achieves 100% statement coverage, but covers one input value

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Component Test-Driven Development is not a correct example of a test-first approach to development
b) Is not correct. Integration Test-Driven Development is not a correct example of a test-first approach to development
c) Is not correct. System Test-Driven Development is not a correct example of a test-first approach to development
d) Is correct. Acceptance Test-Driven Development (ATDD) is a well-known example of a test-first approach to development

Explanation / Rationale

Consider:

i. Is true. Faster product release and faster time to market is an advantage of DevOps
ii. Is false. Typically, we need less effort for manual tests because of the use of test automation
iii. Is true. Constant availability of executable software is an advantage
iv. Is false. More regression tests are needed
v. Is false. Not everything is automated and setting up a test automation framework is expensive

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

Explanation / Rationale

There are three equivalence partitions: {..., 10, 11}, {12}, and {13, 14, ...}.
The boundary values are 11, 12 and 13. In the three-point boundary value analysis for each boundary, we need to test the boundary and both its neighbors, so:

• for 11 we test 10, 11, 12

• for 12 we test 11, 12, 13

• for 13 we test 12, 13, 14

Altogether we need to test 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14

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

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. Test design involves using test conditions to create test cases and other necessary testware, such as test data requirements and test charters for exploratory testing. Test environment requirements are also specified, including the necessary infrastructure and tools
b) Is not correct. Test execution involves executing test cases (as part of test procedures), however it does not directly cover the other testware mentioned in the question, such as test data requirements, test environment requirements and test conditions
c) Is not correct. Test analysis is used to identify the features that require testing. The test basis is analyzed and defined as test conditions, which are then prioritized along with related risks. While this activity involves working with test conditions, it does not cover the other testware mentioned in the question, such as test data requirements, test environment requirements and test cases
d) Is not correct. Test implementation includes the generation of test procedures, such as manual and automated test scripts, which are created from test cases and may be assembled into test suites. Test procedures are prioritized and arranged in a test execution schedule. Test data is created, and the test environment built, and its set up verified. While this activity involves explicitly working with test cases, and may use test data requirements and test environment requirements to create test data and the test environment, it does not cover test conditions

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The benefits of retrospectives include team bonding and learning from sharing issues, and better collaboration between developers and testers through reviewing and improving working practices. Calling out individuals who a team member may feel did not fully contribute to achieving quality as required by the whole-team approach will not contribute to this team bonding and collaboration
b) Is correct. During the retrospective, the group discusses what aspects of the project were successful and should be retained, as well as areas that could be improved, and how to do so
c) Is not correct. The benefits of retrospectives are based on increased effectiveness and efficiency through process improvements; they are not an opportunity to let off steam and criticize management and customers. Also, the results are recorded, usually in the test completion report, so anything said in the meeting could be read by other stakeholders
d) Is not correct. Retrospectives are meetings that are typically held at the end of an iteration where team members will focus on discussing quality-related issues that have occurred in the current iteration. They are not used for making plans or technical decisions for the next iteration; this would be done in the iteration planning meeting at the start of the next iteration

Explanation / Rationale

There are three equivalence partitions: {…, –2, –1}, {0, 1, 2}, {3, 4, …}.
For 2-value BVA all the boundary values for all the equivalence partitions must be covered.
The boundary values are –1 (for the “temperature too low” partition), 0, 2 (for the “temperature OK” partition) and 3 (for the “temperature too high” partition).

Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is not correct
c) Is correct. The correct option is: –1, 0, 2, 3
d) Is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Although it is true that the tester can implement and execute detailed test cases based on the checklist, it does not explain how this would result in increased coverage
b) Is not correct. Checklist items should not be automated. But even if they are, the automated test scripts always execute the tests in the same way, which usually does not result in increased coverage
c) Is not correct. It is true that each checklist item should be tested separately and independently. But this impacts the test execution order and does not impact the achieved coverage, and so does not result in increased coverage
d) Is correct. If the checklists are high-level, some variability in the actual testing is likely to occur, resulting in potentially greater coverage but less repeatability. If two testers follow a checklist of high-level items, each of them may use different test data, test steps, etc. This way, one tester will probably cover some areas not covered by the other tester and this will result in increased coverage

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. This sequence of five events covers 4 different valid transitions (both “NotAvailable” events correspond to the same transition between S1 and S3). This test case covers 4 out of 7 valid transitions
b) Is correct. This sequence of five events covers 5 different transitions (the first “Available” event corresponds to a transition between S1 and S2, and the second “Available” event corresponds to a transition between S3 and S2, so two different transitions are covered). This test case covers 5 out of 7 valid transitions and achieves the highest valid transitions coverage
c) Is not correct. This sequence of five events covers 3 different transitions (both “Available” events correspond to the same transition from S1 to S2; both “ChangeRoom” events correspond to the same transition from S2 to S1). This test case covers 3 out of 7 valid transitions
d) Is not correct. This sequence of five events does not represent a feasible test case, because after “Cancel” the system ends up in the End state and no further valid transitions can be executed

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The test pyramid model does not provide information about test priorities
b) Is correct. The test pyramid model shows that different tests have different levels of granularity
c) Is not correct. The test pyramid model is independent of coverage criteria
d) Is not correct. Test pyramid model does not show any relations between different tests

Explanation / Rationale

Because TC1 and TC3 failed in Execution 1 (i.e., test (1) and test (3)), test (4) and test (6) are confirmation tests.
Because TC2 and TC3 failed in Execution 2 (i.e., tests (5) and (6)), test (8) and test (9) are also confirmation tests.
TC2 passed in Execution 1 (i.e., test (2)), so test (5) is a regression test.
TC1 passed in the Execution 2 (i.e., test (4)), so test (7) is also a regression test.
Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is correct
c) Is not correct
d) Is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. The basic concept behind error guessing is that the tester tries to guess what errors may have been made by the developer and what defects may be in the test object based on past experience (and sometimes checklists)
b) Is not correct. Although a testers who used to be a developer may use their personal experience to help them when performing error guessing, the test technique is not based on prior knowledge of development
c) Is not correct. Error guessing is not a usability technique for guessing how users may fail to interact with the test object
d) Is not correct. Duplicating the development task has several flaws that make it impractical, such as the tester having equivalent skills to the developer and the time involved to perform the development. It is not error guessing

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. Traceability between the mitigated risks and passing test cases provides little information, because to be mitigated (by testing) the risks would need to have a corresponding passing test case. To be able to assess residual risk, traceability between all risks and test results needs to be available, so that the risks that do not have a corresponding passing test can be identified as the residual risks
b) Is correct. Traceability between user requirements and test execution results provides an indication of which user requirements have been tested and so provides a means of measuring project progress (in the context of testing) against business goals
c) Is not correct. It is not clear that failing test cases provide an indication of tester skills any more than passing test cases. It would partly depend on the test objective (e.g., building confidence or causing failures). Also, such measurement of testers based on passing and failing test cases can be counter-productive as it could cause the testers to optimize their testing based on that metric rather than the test objective
d) Is not correct. Traceability between the identified risks and written test conditions provides a means of determining which further test conditions need to be written. Determining which risks are worth testing is part of risk management, and risk mitigation in particular

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

We want to run test cases according to their priorities, but we also need to consider the dependencies.
If we only consider priorities, we want to first run TC 5 and TC 7 (highest priority), then TC 1, TC 3, and TC 4, and finally TC 2 and TC 6 (lowest priority).
However, in order to run TC 7, we need to first run TC 4.
In order to run TC 5, we need to run TC 4 and TC 2, but TC 2 is blocked by TC 1, which should be run prior to TC 2.
So, in order to run priority 1 test cases as early as possible, the first five test cases should be: TC 4 - TC 7 - TC 1 - TC 2 - TC 5.
Next, we need to run TC 3, because it has higher priority than TC 6.
Thus the full schedule will be TC 4 – TC 7 – TC 1 – TC 2 – TC 5 – TC 3 – TC 6.
So, the sixth test case will be TC 3.

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

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Priorities for user stories are determined by the business representative together with the development team
b) Is not correct. Testers focus on both functional and non-functional aspects of the system to be tested
c) Is correct. According to the syllabus, this is one of the ways testers add value to iteration and release planning
d) Is not correct. Early test design is not part of release planning. Early test design does not automatically guarantee the release of quality software

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. This is a new product. You probably do not have a checklist yet and test conditions might not be known due to missing requirements
b) Is not correct. This is a new product. You probably do not have enough information to make correct error guesses
c) Is correct. Exploratory testing is most useful when there are few known specifications and/or there is a pressing timeline for testing
d) Is not correct. Branch testing is time-consuming, and your management is asking about some test results now. Also, branch testing does not involve domain knowledge

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. In all types of reviews there is more than one role, even in informal ones
b) Is correct. There are several activities during the formal review process
c) Is not correct. Documentation to be reviewed should be distributed as early as possible
d) Is not correct. Defects found during the review should be reported