CT-TAE Certified Tester Test Automation Engineer Questions and Answers

 The best internal metric to measure the quality of the Test Automation System (TAS) and the number of problems associated with it would be the defect density within the TAS automation code. This metric provides insight into the robustness and reliability of the automation code itself. A lower defect density indicates higher quality and fewer problems, while a higher defect density may signal the need for improvements in the automation code. This metric is internal because it pertains directly to the quality of the TAS rather than its impact on external processes. References = The ISTQB Test Automation Engineer syllabus and other ISTQB materials emphasize the importance of internal metrics such as defect density to assess the quality and effectiveness of the TAS123.

The reuse of Test Automation System (TAS) artefacts is a key aspect of efficient test automation. Reusable TAS artefacts indeed can include components or parts of components that are associated with different layers of the Test Automation Architecture (TAA). This means that elements designed for one layer, such as the test execution layer, can be reused in another, like the test definition layer, provided they are designed with reusability in mind. This approach not only saves time and resources but also enhances the consistency and maintainability of the test automation effort. It is important to design these artefacts for reuse from the outset to maximize their utility across different testing scenarios and projects.

References = The ISTQB Test Automation Engineer syllabus and other official ISTQB materials discuss the importance of building reuse into the TAS, emphasizing that a good design for reuse should be an integral part of the TAA123.

Linear scripting is the most suitable approach in the described scenario for several reasons:

• Simplicity and Speed: Linear scripting, also known as "record and playback," involves recording steps in a test as they are performed manually on the application under test. This approach is simple and fast to develop, aligning with the need for a solution that is "simple and fast" as mentioned in the question.
• Short-term Use: Given that the maintainability of the scripts is not a concern due to no anticipated changes to the software, the typically high maintenance cost associated with linear scripts is not a drawback in this context. This is because linear scripts can be brittle and may require significant updates if the application changes. However, since the application is a legacy system with no expected changes, this drawback is mitigated.
• Legacy System Context: Legacy systems often have established and stable interfaces, making them less susceptible to the kinds of changes that would typically break linear scripts. This stability makes linear scripting a viable option.
• Infrastructure Migrations: The scripts are intended to verify basic functionality during infrastructure migrations. Linear scripting can effectively capture the end-to-end flow of application usage, ensuring that the basic functionality works as expected after each migration.
• Skill Level Consideration: The Test Analysts have some programming skills but are not necessarily expert programmers. Linear scripting is accessible to individuals with varying levels of programming expertise, making it an inclusive choice that leverages the existing skills of the Test Analysts.

In conclusion, the linear scripting approach aligns with the requirements for simplicity, speed, and suitability for a non-changing legacy system, making it the best choice under the specified conditions.

 Installing the current Test Automation System (TAS) into a central repository allows for consistent use across different Systems Under Test (SUTs). This approach promotes reusability and maintainability of the automation scripts and resources, which is crucial for a company that is expanding its test automation efforts. By using the same version of the TAS, the company ensures that all teams are working with the same tools and standards, which facilitates collaboration and reduces the complexity associated with managing multiple versions of the TAS. Additionally, it helps in streamlining the automation process, as updates and improvements to the TAS can be disseminated quickly and efficiently to all SUTs.

References = The answer is based on the principles outlined in the ISTQB Test Automation Engineer certification materials, which emphasize the importance of consistency, maintainability, and efficiency in test automation practices123.

The gTAA structure is designed to organize the test automation process into distinct layers, each with specific responsibilities:

• a. Test generation layer (3): This layer is responsible for designing test directives that allow configuring the algorithms used to automatically produce the test cases for a given model of the System Under Test (SUT). It involves the creation of models from which test cases can be generated.
• b. Test definition layer (4): This layer allows the definition and implementation of test cases and data by means of templates and/or guidelines. It’s where test cases are articulated and documented.
• c. Test execution layer (2): This layer allows the automated test scripts on an abstract level to interact with components, configurations, and interfaces of the SUT. It’s the practical application of the defined test cases against the SUT.
• d. Test adaptation layer (1): Although not explicitly mentioned in the question, the test adaptation layer is implied as the fourth layer. It acquires all the necessary resources before each test and releases all after the run to avoid interdependencies between tests. This ensures that each test is self-contained and does not affect subsequent tests.

References = The information provided is based on the ISTQB Test Automation Engineer syllabus and the principles of the gTAA structure as outlined in the ISTQB certification materials123.

The most significant challenge in implementing a Test Automation System (TAS) for the given scenario is the complexity to automate, primarily due to the use of several third-party controls that are not compatible with existing automation solutions. This incompatibility introduces a high level of complexity because it may require custom solutions or workarounds to automate these controls. Additionally, the need to run the regression tests at least four times a month for each planned release over the system’s entire operational life further compounds the complexity, as it necessitates a robust and maintainable automation framework that can handle frequent executions without significant maintenance overhead.

References = The answer is derived from the ISTQB Test Automation Engineer syllabus, which emphasizes the importance of selecting appropriate tools and designing a maintainable and scalable automation framework that can handle the complexities of the application under test12. The syllabus also discusses the challenges and considerations when automating tests that involve third-party controls and components12.

 When evaluating the impact of new features on the Test Automation Solution (TAS), it would not be appropriate for the Test Automation Engineer (TAE) to gather feedback from Business Analysts to determine if the current TAS will meet the needs of the new features (Option A). While Business Analysts provide valuable insights into business requirements and the intended functionality of new features, their feedback may not directly inform the technical suitability or readiness of the TAS to handle these new features. Instead, the TAE should focus on technical evaluations such as reviewing existing keywords for necessary modifications (Option B), running existing automated tests against the updated SUT to identify any changes in operation (Option C), and assessing compatibility with existing test tools or identifying alternative solutions (Option D). These actions directly address the technical implications of new features on the TAS, ensuring that the automated testing remains effective and aligned with the evolving requirements of the SUT.

The four horizontal layers of the Generic Test Automation Architecture (gTAA) are designed to provide a structured approach to building test automation solutions. These layers are:

• Test Generation: This layer involves the creation of test cases or test scripts, which can be done manually or through the use of test automation tools.
• Test Definition: This layer involves specifying test objectives, requirements, and criteria to guide the test generation process.
• Test Execution: This layer involves running the test cases or test scripts generated in the previous layers.
• Test Adaptation: This layer involves analyzing test results and modifying the test cases or test scripts to improve the quality of the testing process.

References = The ISTQB CT-TAE syllabus and related documents outline the structure and responsibilities of the different layers within the gTAA, including the generation layer’s role in test case and test data specification12. Additionally, industry resources provide insights into the practical application of these layers in test automation architecture12.

 In a scenario where manual testers are overwhelmed by regression testing, leading to insufficient coverage of new features and an increase in defects, the most pertinent metric to track the value of test automation is the Equivalent Manual Test Effort (EMTE) for the automated tests (Option B). This metric compares the effort required to execute tests manually with the effort saved through automation. By quantifying the time and resources saved by automating regression tests, the TAE can demonstrate the TAS's impact on freeing up manual testers to focus on new feature testing, thereby improving the overall quality and efficiency of the testing process. Tracking EMTE highlights the direct benefits of automation in optimizing testing resources and supports the business case for continued or expanded investment in test automation, especially in scenarios where meeting deadlines and maintaining product quality are critical challenges.

In a keyword-driven framework, especially when dealing with a web application, having a large set of highly specific keywords can lead to redundancy and inefficiency. Implementing keywords with a higher level of granularity can help reduce the number of repeated instances of identical sequences of keywords, as identified by the static analysis tool. This approach promotes reusability and maintainability of test scripts, making the test automation suite more robust and easier to manage. It also aligns with the principles of modularity and abstraction, which are key in test automation engineering.

References = The ISTQB CT-TAE materials emphasize the importance of maintaining a manageable level of abstraction in keyword-driven frameworks to ensure that the automated tests are efficient, maintainable, and provide clear insights into the SUT’s behavior12.

Separating test definition from test execution in a Test Automation Architecture (TAA) is crucial for ensuring flexibility and maintainability in test automation efforts. The best reason for this separation is option B: It allows the test definition to be completed without knowledge of the tool that will be used for execution. This separation abstracts the process of defining what to test (test definition) from how to test (test execution). By decoupling these aspects, test definitions can be written in a more tool-agnostic manner, focusing solely on the testing objectives, requirements, and criteria without being constrained by the capabilities or limitations of any specific test execution tools. This approach not only enhances the reusability of test cases across different tools and environments but also facilitates easier maintenance and updates to the test suite as testing tools evolve or change. It enables a more sustainable and adaptable test automation framework that can better respond to changes in technology, tools, and testing needs over time.

Transitioning from a waterfall to a Scrum methodology for a Windows/GUI based SUT requires the TAS to be agile and adaptable to frequent changes. The best steps to undertake during the review would be:

d) Review the functions that act upon the controls for the GUI for possible consolidation. This step is crucial because it directly addresses the adaptability of the TAS to the new user interface, ensuring that the functions are optimized for the modernized UI.

e) Involve the test team to see what ease-of-use improvements they would like to see made to the TAS. The test team’s involvement is essential for identifying practical improvements from a user perspective, which can significantly enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the TAS during the iterative sprints of the Scrum methodology.

These steps are aligned with the ISTQB’s emphasis on ensuring that the TAS is not only technically sound but also user-friendly and responsive to the needs of the test team, which is critical in an agile environment123.

References = The ISTQB Test Automation Engineer syllabus and study materials highlight the importance of reviewing and optimizing the TAS to support new methodologies and technologies123. The ISTQB also stresses the significance of involving the test team in the review process to ensure that the TAS remains effective and relevant123.

The best recommendation for improving the Test Automation System (TAS) in this scenario is to implement standard setup and teardown functions at the test case level. This approach promotes reusability and efficiency by allowing the same initial and final sequences of steps to be used across multiple test cases. By centralizing these sequences into common functions, any changes to the setup or teardown process only need to be made in one place, thus reducing maintenance efforts and potential for errors. Furthermore, it streamlines the execution of test cases and makes the automation framework more robust and easier to manage.

References = This recommendation aligns with the ISTQB Test Automation Engineer guidelines, which advocate for the use of reusable components and functions to enhance the maintainability and scalability of the test automation architecture12. The principles of designing an effective TAS include creating modular and reusable components that can be shared across different test cases, which is essential for improving the overall efficiency and reliability of the test automation efforts12.

A test execution report is primarily used to identify problematic areas of the System Under Test (SUT) by maintaining a history of which test cases fail most frequently. This allows teams to track trends over time, pinpoint recurring issues, and focus their testing and development efforts on the most problematic areas. The report serves as a historical record that can be analyzed to improve the quality and reliability of the SUT.

References = The use of test execution reports in test automation is well-documented in industry best practices and resources. These reports are essential for providing a consolidated summary of the testing performed, highlighting areas for improvement, and enabling informed decision-making for optimizing testing strategies12. They are not typically used to understand individual test step failures, measure test coverage, or record how failures have been fixed, as those are often addressed in more specific testing documentation or tools.

Observability in the context of a System Under Test (SUT) refers to the degree to which the internal states of the system can be inferred from knowledge of its external outputs. It is a measure of how well internal states of a system can be understood by examining its outputs. In test automation, observability is crucial because it allows testers to understand what is happening inside the SUT without having direct access to its internal workings. This characteristic is essential for identifying and diagnosing issues, understanding system behavior, and ensuring that the system is functioning correctly. High observability means that the system’s outputs, including its states and any intermediate results or error messages, are readily available for examination, which is vital for effective testing and debugging.

References = The ISTQB Test Automation Engineer syllabus and study materials emphasize the importance of observability as part of the testability of systems. It is highlighted as a key characteristic that enables testers to detect defects and understand system behavior through the outputs the system provides during test execution123.

When planning the pilot for an in-house developed Test Automation Solution (TAS), it is crucial to prepare the involved personnel and ensure that the necessary resources are allocated. Running training workshops for new users (option c) is essential to familiarize them with the TAS and to promote effective usage. Additionally, developing a project plan and reserving the necessary budget and resources (option d) are fundamental steps to ensure that the pilot is well-structured and that its implementation is feasible. These steps help in laying a solid foundation for the pilot, which can lead to a successful deployment of the TAS.

References = The answer is derived from the ISTQB CT-TAE guidelines, which outline the importance of training and resource allocation in the planning process of a test automation solution123.

In this scenario, where the main goal is to verify the compatibility of the automation tool with the application and its ability to recognize objects and controls, capture-replay scripting would be the most suitable technique. This approach allows you to record manual test cases as they are performed in the browser and then replay them automatically. It’s a quick way to convert manual tests into automated ones without requiring extensive programming knowledge. Capture-replay tools can help validate that the tool can interact with the application as expected and identify any potential issues with object recognition.

References = The ISTQB Test Automation Engineer syllabus covers the different scripting techniques and their appropriate usage scenarios. For a detailed understanding of capture-replay scripting and its benefits for initial automation efforts, refer to the official ISTQB Test Automation Engineer documents and training resources12.

The key challenge in this context is ensuring that the automated solution is compatible with mobile devices. Since the website must be “mobile friendly,” it is crucial that the automation covers the functionality on mobile platforms. However, automating tests for mobile browsers can be more complex due to the variety of devices, screen sizes, and operating systems. This complexity can make it challenging to ensure that the automation is effective across all potential user scenarios.

References = The ISTQB Test Automation Engineer (CT-TAE) documents and training resources provide comprehensive information on the challenges and considerations for test automation in a mobile-friendly context. These resources emphasize the importance of designing automation that is adaptable to different environments and can handle the intricacies of mobile platforms.

 The most crucial first step after an abnormal termination is to take a backup of the database in its current state. This ensures that you have a snapshot of the system at the point of failure, which is invaluable for a thorough post-mortem analysis. Without this, you may lose critical information about the state of the system that could help identify the root cause of the failure. Once the backup is secured, you can proceed with restoring the system to a consistent state and continue with subsequent tests or rerun the test suite as needed.

References = The ISTQB Test Automation Engineer syllabus and best practices highlight the importance of error recovery processes and the preservation of test artifacts for analysis. Taking a backup aligns with these guidelines as it allows for an accurate assessment of the failure and aids in improving the

The re-occurrence of a defect that has been previously resolved and validated can be attributed to issues in the configuration management process. If the configuration management process is not robust, it may fail to maintain proper synchronization between software archives. This can lead to situations where the defect re-emerges in future releases because the software components are not correctly integrated or updated with the defect fix. Effective configuration management is crucial for ensuring that all software artifacts are correctly versioned and that changes are properly tracked and integrated across all versions of the software. References = The ISTQB Test Automation Engineer syllabus outlines the importance of configuration management in relation to test automation and defect management. It emphasizes the need for proper control and synchronization of software archives to prevent the re-occurrence of defects123.

For the scenario of automating functional tests at the system test level via the Command Line Interface (CLI) of the SUT, with the requirements for fast and cheap maintenance, low cost for adding new tests, and high independence from the automation tool, the most suitable scripting technique is Data-driven scripting. This approach externalizes test data from the scripts into separate data files or repositories, allowing for the reuse of test scripts with different sets of data. Data-driven scripting is ideal for meeting the specified requirements because it enables rapid execution of a large number of test cases by merely changing the input data, without the need to alter the scripts themselves. This significantly reduces maintenance costs and the effort required to add new tests, as the core script remains the same. Moreover, this technique enhances the independence of the automated tests from the specific tools used, as the focus is on the data and the generic actions performed by the scripts, making it the most suitable choice for the described needs.