Decoding ISTQB CTFL v4.0 Personal Insights – Part I

Recently, I acquired the book "Software Testing - An ISTQB-BCS Certified Tester Foundation Level Guide (CTFL v4.0) Fifth Edition" by Geoff Thompson , Peter Morgan , Angelina Samaroo FIET , John Kurowski , Peter Williams , Marie Salmon and Paul Weymouth , and technically, it’s excellent! Easy to read, easy to understand! ??

However, as any tester that loves what he does, I had to introspect to truly grasp the meaning of its contents and understand what updates I need to make for myself and those I coach.

In my +-1 year of review this new ISTQB v4 foundation, I’ve discovered fresh ideas and curiosities that I’ll share in a series of posts.

To kick off this Linkedin post series, let’s talk about testing levels ??

In version 3.0, there were four levels:

• Level 1 = Component Testing,
• Level 2 = Integration Testing,
• Level 3 = System Testing,
• Level 4 = Acceptance Testing.

#CTFL Version 4.0 introduces:

• Level 1 = Component Testing,
• Level 2 = Component Integration Testing,
• Level 3 = System Testing,
• Level 4 = System Integration Testing,
• Level 5 = Acceptance Testing.

I was curious about this change. ??♂?

Remembering the ISTQB v2.0 or 2011 version as it is called, the 4 classic testing levels were generally aligned by QA teams in designing test cases with clear objectives.

The book brought me some light ?? on this change: the goal was to introduce two levels of integration testing: one following component level (as always ??) and a new one after system testing.

Why?

(I'll keep it simple, and forgive the authors for that)

Simplistically the 3th level (system Testing) aims to validate end-to-end (E2E) tests cases.

However, interfaces connecting with third-party systems—where the development team isn’t directly responsible—didn’t fit well within system testing (level 3). Yet, the aim of (new) Level 4 (system integration) tests remains defect detection, not final stakeholder acceptance as in the now-renamed Level 5 (previously Level 4 UAT), thus providing clear distinction.

But my curiosity didn’t stop there.????

With five levels now, how does this fit into the V-model I’ve always known with four levels?

The book provided an answer that had eluded me: after requirement specification, a "Business Process" level precedes "Functional Specification".

Even if it's not very clear what it is, it's understood.

#Testing #Tester #QA #TestingEngineer #QualityAssurance #SoftwareTesting #QAManager #SWTesting #TestingCommunity #GalpQA #ISTQB #ISTQBFoundation #V-Model #TestLevels