CTFL-AT Questions and Answers

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

FromCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.5Testers and Independence, it explains:

"An independent test team may be used in parallel to Agile teams to support non-sprint activities such as performance testing, test tool development, or testing in regulated environments."

However, assigningfunctional testing to independent teamswhile Agile teams handlenon-functionalwork is theoppositeof common practice. Agile teams typically focus onfunctional testing, while specializednon-functionalor compliance testing may be handled externally.

Therefore,Option Ais least likely to be true.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

FromCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 5.4Progress Tracking, it explains:

"Burndown charts track completed story points, which are only counted when the entire user story is 'done'."

SinceT3 and T4 are not complete, and the user story is only complete whenall its tasks are done, thestory points are not yet burned. So,Option Cis correct.

Option Ais incorrect —partial completiondoes not burn partial story points.

Option Bmisrepresents the chart’s purpose —story pointsremain the unit.

As an agile tester, you should work together with the developer, suggesting reasons why the tests are failing. This is an example of the agile principle of collaboration and communication within the team, as well as the agile testing practice of early and frequent feedback. By working together with the developer, you can help to identify and resolve the root causes of the test failures, as well as share your testing knowledge and perspective. This can lead to faster and better quality delivery of the user story, as well as improved team relationships and trust.

Option A is not a good action, because reviewing and improving the design of the user story is not the tester’s responsibility, and it may not address the test failures. Option B is also not a good action, because creating bug reports for blocked tests is not an agile way of handling issues, and it may create unnecessary overhead and waste. Option D is not a good action, because it does not help to unblock the current user story, and it may distract you from the sprint goal and the team’s focus.

 Early and frequent feedback is one of the core values of Agile development. It helps the Agile team to deliver features with the highest business value first, to discover and resolve quality problems as soon as possible, to provide information on the team’s productivity and progress, and to ensure that the product meets the customer’s expectations and needs. However, early feedback does not necessarily decrease the amount of time needed for system testing, as system testing is still an important activity in Agile projects to verify the integration and functionality of the whole system. Early feedback may reduce the number of defects found in system testing, but it does not eliminate the need for system testing. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Extension Syllabus1, page 10; ISTQB Agile Tester Sample Exam2, question 11.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

From theCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 4.2Continuous Integration, it states:

"Continuous integration involves integrating code into a shared repository several times a day. Each integration is verified by an automated build and automated tests."

Hence,Option D—at least once a day— correctly reflects best practice in continuous integration.

Option A(once per iteration) andB,Care far too infrequent to meet the goals of CI.

The objective is to detect integration issuesearly and often, which is only achievable throughdaily (or more frequent)integrations.

The Agile Manifesto is a declaration of four values and twelve principles that guide the Agile software development approach12. The four values of the Agile Manifesto are12:

Individuals and interactions over processes and tools

Working software over comprehensive documentation

Customer collaboration over contract negotiation

Responding to change over following a plan

These values emphasize the importance of human collaboration, working product, customer feedback, and adaptability over rigid processes, extensive documentation, fixed contracts, and predefined plans. The values do not imply that the items on the right are not important, but rather that the items on the left are more important and should be prioritized.

Therefore, the statement that is NOT a value from the Agile Manifesto is B, as it contradicts the first value of the Agile Manifesto. The correct statement should be “Individuals and interactions over processes and tools”. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Extension Syllabus1, page 10; ISTQB Agile Tester Sample Exam2, question 1.

The best black box test design technique for verifying the accuracy of this user story is equivalence partitioning. Equivalence partitioning is a technique that divides the input domain of a system into classes or groups that are expected to behave similarly. By testing one value from each class, the tester can reduce the number of test cases while still achieving good coverage. In this case, the input domainof the system is the amount of income, which can be divided into classes based on the tax percentage applied to different income ranges. For example, if the tax percentage is 10% for income below 10,000, 20% for income between 10,000 and 20,000, and 30% for income above 20,000, then the equivalence classes are: low income (<10,000), medium income (10,000-20,000), and high income (>20,000). By testing one value from each class, such as 5,000, 15,000, and 25,000, the tester can verify that the system calculates the correct tax percentage for each income range. This technique is more efficient and effective than testing all possible values of income, or testing only one value of income, or testing the states of income entry, or testing the statements in income calculation. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Syllabus1, Section 2.3.1, page 19; ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Extension Sample Exam Questions2, Question 5, page 6.

 Agile software development is a term that encompasses a group of software development methodologies that are based on iterative incremental development, where requirements and solutions evolve through collaboration between self-organizing cross-functional teams. Agile methods promote adaptive planning, evolutionary development and delivery, a time-boxed iterative approach, and encourage rapid and flexible response to change. Some examples of agile methods are Scrum, Extreme Programming (XP), Kanban, and Lean Software Development. References:

: ISTQB® Foundation Level Agile Tester Syllabus, Version 2014, Section 1.1.1

: ASTQB Agile Tester Certification Resources, Agile Testing Foundations, Chapter 1, Section 1.1.1

Regression of software is the risk that a change in one part of the software causes a defect in another part of the software that was previously working correctly. Regression of software is a high risk in agile projects because there is code churn due to change in business needs over several sprints. Code churn is the amount of code that is added, modified, or deleted in a software project over time. Code churn can indicate the volatility and complexity of the software, and the frequency and magnitude of the changes. In agile projects, code churn can be highbecause the business needs and the user requirements can change rapidly and frequently over several sprints, which are short iterations of development and testing. This means that the software is constantly evolving and adapting to the changing needs, and that the existing functionality and quality may be affected by the new or modified code. Therefore, regression of software is a high risk in agile projects, and it requires effective testing strategies and techniques to prevent, detect, and fix the regression defects. References: ISTQB® Foundation Level Agile Tester Syllabus1, Section 2.3.2, page 17; ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms2, version 4.0, pages 36 and 55

The whole-team approach is a principle of agile testing that involves everyone with different knowledge and skills to ensure project success. The whole-team approach means that the business representatives, testers, and developers work together in every step of the development process, from planning to delivery. The whole-team approach aims to enhance communication and collaboration within the team, leverage the various skill sets of the team members, and make quality everyone’s responsibility12. Therefore, the statement C is the most direct advantage of the whole-team approach, as it captures the essence of the principle and its benefits. The other statements are not directly related to the whole-team approach, or are incorrect. Statement A is about continuous integration, which is a practice of agile development that involves having at least once a day an automated build and test process that detects integration errors early and quickly. Continuous integration is not a direct consequence of the whole-team approach, although it may be facilitated by it13. Statement B is about avoiding requirements misunderstandings, which may be a benefit of the whole-team approach, but not the most direct one. The whole-team approach does not only focus on requirements, but also on design, implementation, testing, and delivery. Moreover, avoiding requirements misunderstandings may also depend on other factors, such as the quality of the user stories, the use of acceptance criteria, and the feedback from the customers and users14. Statement D is incorrect, as it contradicts the whole-team approach. The whole-team approach does not reduce the involvement of business representatives, but rather increases it. Business representatives are an integral part of the whole-team approach, as they provide the vision, the value, and the validation of the product. They collaborate with the testers and developers to define the features, prioritize the backlog, and verify the outcomes12. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Syllabus1, Section 1.2.1, page 9; What is Whole Team Approach in Agile Testing?2, Section What is Whole Team Approach?; Continuous Integration3, Section What is Continuous Integration?; Effective User Stories - 3C’s and INVEST Guide4, Section The 3 C’s (Card, Conversation, Confirmation) of User Stories.

Risk-based testing is a technique that prioritizes testing activities based on the level of risk associated with each feature or requirement. The level of risk is usually calculated by multiplying the probability and impact of each risk. The higher the risk level, the more testing effort should be allocated to mitigate the risk. In this case, the risk level for each option is as follows: A. Risk level = Low x Low = Low B. Risk level = Low x High = Medium C. Risk level = High x High = High D. Risk level = High x Low = Medium Therefore, the highest risk level is C, followed by B and D, and then A. The User Story for the Operator-Instructions module should be tested according to this risk order, starting with C, then B, then D, and finally A. Hence, the answer is B, as it is the second highest risk level and should be tested after C. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Extension Syllabus1, page 16; ISTQB Agile Tester Sample Exam2, question 18.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

FromCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.5Testers and Independence, it states:

"Testers may be assigned to Agile teams on a permanent or rotating basis. While full independence is compromised, this setup allows for better collaboration and understanding of the product, while still maintaining some degree of independence."

Thus,Option Bis the most accurate —long-term embedded testerssupport Agile collaboration while preservingpartial independence.

Option Aleads tolate involvement, which contradicts Agile principles.

Option Csacrifices independence entirely.

Option Dis traditional and contrary to Agile values of collaboration.

The tester within an Agile team is not responsible for ensuring all project status meetings are held according to the plan. This is typically a task for the Scrum Master, who facilitates the meetings and ensures that the team follows the Agile principles and practices. The tester within an Agile team is responsible for ensuring the appropriate testing tasks are scheduled during iteration planning, suggesting improvements in team retrospectives, and working with business stakeholders to clarifyrequirements. These are all tasks that contribute to the quality of the software and the testing process, as well as the collaboration and communication within the team and with the customers. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Syllabus, Section 2.3.1, page 171; ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Sample Exam Questions, Question 2.3.1-1, page 82

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

From theCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.3The Role of Feedback, it explains:

"Agile development promotes early and continuous feedback, which leads to the development of a product that better meets customer needs and expectations."

Also:

"Frequent feedback loops support the team in identifying and resolving issues earlier, improving both the product quality and customer satisfaction."

Therefore,Option Dis the most accurate reflection of thetrue benefit of early and frequent feedbackin Agile environments.

Option Aincorrectly implies Agile feedback redistributes defect clustering, which is not a recognized principle.

Option Bmakes an unverifiable claim about defect volume at the unit level. Agile encourages unit testing, but this comparison is not substantiated in the syllabus.

Option Cis incorrect because feedback providesbothstability and quality indicators early on.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

FromCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.2Release and Iteration Planning, it describes Planning Poker as:

"Planning Poker involves group discussion, especially from the highest and lowest estimators, to ensure that different perspectives and assumptions are aligned, which leads to more accurate and shared understanding of the effort involved."

Thus,Option Cis correct — Team B usesdiscussion-based estimation, which is a corebenefitof Planning Poker.

Option Ais speculative — we cannot know the actual effort difference.

Option Bis incorrect — convergence without discussion may indicatelack of engagement or pressure to agree.

Option Dis false — Planning Poker isnot based on averaging, but onconsensus.

The test charter for the exploratory testing session is focused on buying a bus ticket, not a parking ticket. Therefore, any defect related to the payment for parking ticket is out of scope for the given test charter. The other defects are related to the functionality, usability, or reliability of buying a bus ticket, which are in scope for the test charter. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester Extension Syllabus, Version 2014, Section 2.3.2 Exploratory Testing1, Section 2.3.2.1 Test Charter2; ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 3.2, 2017, Definition of Test Charter3

1: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester Extension Syllabus, Version 2014, Section 2.3.2 Exploratory Testing 2: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester Extension Syllabus, Version 2014, Section 2.3.2.1 Test Charter 3: [ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 3.2, 2017, Definition of Test Charter]

According to the ISTQB Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester syllabus, acceptance criteria are a set of conditions that a user story must satisfy to be accepted by the customer or stakeholder. Acceptance criteria should be testable, meaning that they can be verified by objective measurements or observations. Testable acceptance criteria should be clear, unambiguous, complete, and consistent. Therefore, option A is the best example for testable acceptance criteria, as it specifies a clear and measurable condition for the input value of the ID field. Option B is not a good example for testable acceptance criteria, as it is vague and does not define any specific condition or expectation for the interface to External System. Option C is not a good example for testable acceptance criteria, as it is incomplete and does not specify what the specific authorization level is or how it is determined. Option D is not a good example for testable acceptance criteria, as it is subjective and not measurable. What is clear and attractive for one user may not be for another. References: ISTQB Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester syllabus, section 1.1.1, page 7; ISTQB Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester syllabus, section 1.1.2, page 8; ISTQB Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester syllabus, section 3.1.1, page 23; ISTQB Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester syllabus, section 3.1.2, page 24.

3of30

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

FromCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.1Acceptance Criteria and Testability, it states:

"Tests should directly address the acceptance criteria defined for a user story. Testers evaluate if the implemented feature meets the criteria, often using quantitative data like number of steps, time taken, or interaction patterns."

Theacceptance criterionspecifically refers tominimizing steps during checkout, soOption Dis most directly aligned with what needs to be tested.

Options A, B, and Care unrelated to the acceptance criterion’s goal of reducing abandonment due to complex checkout.

A testable acceptance criterion is a condition that can be verified or measured objectively by the tester, customer, or stakeholder. It should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART). A testable acceptance criterion should also be written from the user’s perspective, achievable within the sprint, and written before development begins1.

Among the four options, only option C meets these criteria. It is specific (the response time to confirm a customer submission), measurable (must not exceed 5 seconds), achievable (within the technical and business constraints), relevant (to the user’s needs and expectations), and time-bound (must be met in every sprint). It is also written from the user’s perspective, testable (by measuring the response time), and written before development (as part of the user story definition).

Option A is not testable because it is vague and subjective. What does it mean to support business processes? How can this be verified or measured? Option B is also not testable because it is subjective and ambiguous. What does it mean to be easy to use? How can this be verified or measured? Option D is not testable because it is not written from the user’s perspective. It is an internal quality criterion for the testing team, not an acceptance criterion for the product or feature.