Test analysis and design is the activity in the fundamental test process that includes identifying necessary test data.  Test data are the inputs that are used to execute the test cases and verify the expected results 2  defines this activity as follows:

Test analysis and design has the following major tasks:

Reviewing the test basis (such as requirements, risk analysis reports, design documents or code).

Identifying test conditions based on analysis of test items, specifications, behavior and structure of the software.

Designing high-level test cases based on test conditions and designing techniques.

Evaluating testability of requirements and system under test.

Defining exit criteria.

Evaluating exit criteria and reporting (A) is part of the test closure activities, where the results of testing are evaluated against the defined objectives. Test implementation and execution (B) is where the test cases are executed using the identified test data and deviations from expected results are documented. Test planning and control © is where the overall approach and resources for testing are defined and monitored.

A walkthrough is lead by a moderator and requires pre-meeting preparation and post meeting follow up is the statement that is not true about walkthroughs, because it describes a different type of review called inspection . A walkthrough is a type of informal review that involves the author of a document presenting it to a group of peers or stakeholders to establish a common understanding and to find possible defects . A walkthrough does not have a moderator, but rather an author who leads the review. A walkthrough does not require pre-meeting preparation or post meeting follow up, but rather relies on the author’s knowledge and skills . The other options are true statements about walkthroughs. Option B is true, because a walkthrough may take the form of scenarios, dry runs and peer group review, depending on the type and purpose of the document being reviewed . Option C is true, because the purpose of a walkthrough is to establish common understanding of a document and to find possible defects in it . Option D is true, because pre-meeting preparation, documentation and distribution of results are optional for a walkthrough, as they depend on the author’s discretion and preference .

Having an independent test function in an organisation can improve defect finding during reviews and testing, because independent testers can provide a different perspective and have less bias than developers or other stakeholders.  Independent testers can also focus on testing activities without being influenced by development pressures or deadlines 1 2 . The other options are not valid reasons for having an independent test function. Option B is more related to code reviews, which can be done by developers themselves or by peers. Option C is not beneficial, because communication between developers and testers is essential for effective testing and defect resolution.  Option D is not directly related to the test function, but to the test management and reporting processes 1 2 .

Assigning resources for the planned activities is an activity that is appropriate to the test planning stage, because it involves estimating and allocating the necessary human and physical resources for testing . Test planning is the process of defining the objectives, scope, approach, and resources for testing . The other options are not activities that are appropriate to the test planning stage, but rather to other stages of testing. Option A is an activity that is appropriate to the test analysis stage, because it involves analysing the test basis (such as requirements, design, or code) to identify test conditions . Option C is an activity that is appropriate to the test implementation stage, because it involves designing and preparing the test environments (such as hardware, software, network, or data) for test execution . Option D is an activity that is appropriate to the test execution stage, because it involves writing a test execution schedule that defines the order and dependencies of test cases or procedures .

It is a project risk since successful completion of the project depends on successful and timely completion of the tests. defines project risks as follows:

Project risks are risks that affect the project schedule, resources, or budget. They can be related to the project management process, such as planning, estimation, communication, or monitoring. Project risks can also be related to external factors, such as dependencies, stakeholders, vendors, or regulations.

It is not a product risk (B and C), as product risks are risks that affect the quality or performance of the software product. defines product risks as follows:

Product risks are risks that affect the functionality, reliability, usability, efficiency, maintainability, or portability of the software product. They can be related to the software requirements, design, implementation, or testing. Product risks can also be related to user expectations, needs, or satisfaction.

It is not no longer a risk for the Test Manager (D), as the sub-contractor’s failure may still impact the Test Manager’s responsibilities and deliverables. The Test Manager should monitor and mitigate this risk as much as possible.

The most important report improvement is A. Add an impact analysis. An impact analysis is an assessment of how the defect affects the functionality, usability, performance, reliability, security, or other aspects of the system under test. An impact analysis can help prioritize and classify the defect based on its severity and urgency. An impact analysis can also help determine the root cause and possible solutions for the defect. An impact analysis is an essential part of a defect report because it provides useful information for decision-making and improvement processes.

The other report improvements are not as important as adding an impact analysis because they do not provide as much information or value for decision-making and improvement processes. For example:

B. Add information about which developer should fix the bug: This report improvement is not necessary because it is not part of the information that is required to describe, reproduce, and prioritize the defect. The assignment of developers to fix bugs is part of the defect management process, which involves assigning, tracking, resolving, and verifying defects.

C. Add the time stamp when the incident happened: This report improvement is not very useful because it does not provide much information about the cause or effect of the defect. The time stamp when the incident happened is only relevant if it is related to some external factors or events that could influence the behavior or performance of the system under test.

D. Add information about which web browser was used: This report improvement is not very relevant because it does not affect the functionality or usability of the system under test. The web browser used is only relevant if it is related to some compatibility or interoperability issues that could cause defects or failures in the system under test.

You can find more information about defect reports and impact analysis in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 5.

The extent of testing required for a software product or feature depends on several factors that influence the level of quality and risk involved in delivering or deploying it. Some of these factors are:

Budget to do testing: This factor indicates how much money is available or allocated for conducting the test activities, which affects the scope, depth, duration, and resources of testing.

Time available to do testing: This factor indicates how much time is available or allocated for conducting the test activities, which affects the schedule, frequency, speed, and coverage of testing.

Level of risk of the product or feature: This factor indicates how much impact or harm a failure or defect in the product or feature can cause to the users, customers, stakeholders, or environment, which affects the priority, intensity, complexity, and rigor of testing.

Complexity of the product or feature: This factor indicates how difficult or challenging it is to understand, design, implement, or maintain the product or feature, which affects the effort, skill, technique, and tool required for testing.

A particular tester involved in testing is not a deciding factor in determining the extent of testing required because it does not affect the quality or risk level of the product or feature being tested. Rather, it is an outcome or consequence of deciding how much testing is needed based on other factors such as budget, time, risk, and complexity. You can find more information about determining the extent of testing in  Software Testing Foundations: A Study Guide for the Certified T ester Exam , Chapter 2, Section 2.1 2 .

The requirement given in the image specifies an additional fee of $3 that is charged during the weekend, with some exceptions and discounts based on the age of the visitors. To test this requirement, we can use boundary value analysis, which is a specification-based test technique that involves testing the values at or near the boundaries of an equivalence partition. An equivalence partition is a set of values that are expected to be treated in the same way by the system under test. For example, based on the requirement, we can identify the following equivalence partitions for the input age:

EP1: Age < 0 (invalid)

EP2: Age = 0 (valid, no charge)

EP3: 0 < Age < 7 (valid, no charge)

EP4: Age = 7 (valid, 20% discount)

EP5: 7 < Age < 13 (valid, 20% discount)

EP6: Age = 13 (valid, 20% discount)

EP7: 13 < Age < 65 (valid, full charge)

EP8: Age = 65 (valid, 50% discount)

EP9: Age > 65 (valid, 50% discount)

The boundary values for each equivalence partition are the values at or near the edges of the partition. For example, the boundary values for EP3 are 1 and 6. The boundary values for EP4 are 6 and 7. The boundary values for EP5 are 7 and 12. And so on.

To test this requirement using boundary value analysis, we need to select one value from each boundary and test it with different combinations of weekend and weekday. For example, we can select the following values:

BV1: Age = -1 (from EP1)

BV2: Age = 0 (from EP2 and EP3)

BV3: Age = 6 (from EP3 and EP4)

BV4: Age = 7 (from EP4 and EP5)

BV5: Age = 12 (from EP5 and EP6)

BV6: Age = 13 (from EP6 and EP7)

BV7: Age = 64 (from EP7 and EP8)

BV8: Age = 65 (from EP8 and EP9)

BV9: Age = 66 (from EP9)

We can then create test cases using these values and different combinations of weekend and weekday. For example:

TC1: Age = -1, Weekend = Yes - > Invalid input

TC2: Age = -1, Weekend = No - > Invalid input

TC3: Age = 0, Weekend = Yes - > No charge

TC4: Age = 0, Weekend = No - > No charge

TC5: Age = 6, Weekend = Yes - > No charge

TC6: Age = 6, Weekend = No - > No charge

TC7: Age = 7, Weekend = Yes - > $2.40 ($3 - 20% discount)

TC8: Age = 7, Weekend = No - > No charge

TC9: Age = 12, Weekend = Yes - > $2.40 ($3 - 20% discount)

TC10: Age = 12, Weekend = No - > No charge

TC11: Age = 13, Weekend = Yes - > $2.40 ($3 - 20% discount)

TC12: Age = 13, Weekend = No - > No charge

TC13: Age = 64, Weekend = Yes - > $3

TC14: Age = 64, Weekend = No - > No charge

TC15: Age = 65, Weekend = Yes - > $1.50 ($3 - 50% discount)

TC16: Age = 65, Weekend = No - > No charge

TC17: Age = 66, Weekend = Yes - > $1.50 ($3 - 50% discount)

TC18: Age =

66, Weekend = No - > No charge

Therefore, we need a minimum of  18  valid test cases to achieve  100%  boundary value coverage based on input age.

$3.01 is not a valid output boundary value because it is not a possible output value based on the requirement. The output values can only be $0, $1.50, $2.40, or $3 depending on the input age and weekend status.

You can find more information about boundary value analysis in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.2.

Statement testing is part of structure-based testing, which is a type of testing that verifies the internal structure or implementation of a software system, such as code, architecture, design, etc. Statement testing is a structure-based test technique that involves testing every statement in the code at least once to ensure that there are no syntax errors, logical errors, or hidden defects in the code. Statement testing requires some knowledge of the internal structure or implementation of the software system; it focuses on how the system does what it does rather than what it does.

The other types of testing mentioned in the question are not related to statement testing because they do not verify the internal structure or implementation of a software system. For example:

A. Experience-based testing: This type of testing relies on the skills, knowledge, intuition, and creativity of testers to design and execute test cases based on their experience with similar systems or situations.

B. Decision testing: This type of testing verifies every decision point in the code by testing all possible outcomes or branches of each decision point to ensure that there are no logical errors or hidden defects in the code.

C. Specification-based testing: This type of testing verifies the external behavior or functionality of a software system based on its requirements, specifications, design documents, or other sources of information.

You can find more information about statement testing and structure-based testing in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.3.

A decision table is a specification-based test technique that involves creating a table that shows the combinations of inputs and outputs for a system under test based on certain conditions and rules. A decision table can be used to design test cases that cover all possible scenarios and outcomes for a system under test. Some statements about decision tables are:

I. Generally, decision tables are generated for low risk test items: This statement is false because decision tables can be generated for any level of risk test items depending on the complexity and variability of the system under test. Decision tables are especially useful for testing systems that have many inputs, outputs, conditions, and rules that affect their behavior or performance.

II. Test cases derived from decision tables can be used for component tests: This statement is true because decision tables can be used to design test cases for any level or type of testing, including component tests. Component tests are tests that verify individual components or units of software in isolation from other components or systems.

III. Several test cases can be selected for each column of the decision table: This statement is true because each column of the decision table represents a unique combination of inputs and outputs for the system under test based on certain conditions and rules. Therefore, each column can be used as a basis for selecting one or more test cases that cover that combination.

IV. The conditions in the decision table represent negative tests generally: This statement is false because the conditions in the decision table can represent both positive and negative tests depending on the requirements and expectations of the system under test. Positive tests are tests that verify that the system under test behaves as expected under valid or normal inputs or conditions. Negative tests are tests that verify that the system under test handles errors or exceptions gracefully under invalid or abnormal inputs or conditions.

You can find more information about decision tables in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.2.