iSQI CTFL-AT Exam With Confidence Using Practice Dumps

 Equivalence partitioning is a black-box test design technique that divides the input domain of a system into classes of data from which test cases can be derived. The idea is that if a system works correctly for a representative value from an equivalence class, it will work correctly for all values from that class, and vice versa. Equivalence partitioning reduces the number of test cases by eliminating redundant ones. For the given user story, equivalence partitioning is the most suitable technique because it can test the different outcomes of the annual car tax calculation based on the power of the vehicle, which is the main input for the system. By testing one value from each partition, the tester can verify the functionality of the system and detect any errors in the calculation logic. The other techniques are not as suitable because they do not focus on the inputdomain of the system, but rather on the conditions, transitions, or scenarios that are not directly related to the user story. References:

• : ISTQB® Foundation Level Agile Tester Syllabus, Version 2014, Section 2.2.2
• : ASTQB Agile Tester Certification Resources, Agile Testing Foundations, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2
• : 3

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.

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.

References: ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Syllabus, Section 2.3.1, page 171; ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Sample Exam Questions, Question 2.3.1-2, page 82