Certified Tester Advanced Level Test Automation Engineering v1.0

New features have been added for the current release of a SUT.
Which action would NOT be appropriate for the TAE to perform when evaluating the impact on the TAS?

Which of the following CORRECTLY describes how automation SHOULD be applied to confirmation testing?

You are a TAE working for a software house which provides quarterly releases of its software to its customers. There are many different versions of the SUT that need to be tested simultaneously by different tests teams.
Your TAS is complex and you need to ensure it remains consistent across the different SUT environments. What is the BEST and MOST efficient way to ensure each of the test teams use the same version of the TAS to test the different versions of the SUT?

Your company is new to test automation and as TAE, you have designed a TAS which successfully supports the SUT for the current project.
There are other systems currently in operation which have been tested manually and more systems are planned over the coming years. Based on this success, your company requires test automation be rolled out to other current and future SUTs with consistency being a key objective.
Which of the following is the BEST way to achieve that?

You have executed an automated test suite for a product that was released into production. Although all the tests passed, there was a major failure in production in an area that was covered well by your automated tests.
You have run the automated tests again and one of the tests is now failing and this is directly related to the production defect that was raised. You decide to run the automated test suite again on the same version of the SUT and the test now passes.
What SHOULD you do now to verify the validity of the automated tests?

You are the TAE for an Agile project which has six sprints for the current release. Sprint five is underway and the automated regression suite is due to start later today.
You have re-examined the results from the automated regression runs for the past four sprints. You notice that two test cases both reported a pass for sprints 1 and 4 but a fail for sprints 2 and 3. The failures have gone undetected and are therefore unexplained. Both test cases are closely coupled with other tests in the suite.
What course of action SHOULD you take?

You have implemented a keyword-driven scripting framework, which uses a test execution tool to run the tests. This has been in use for the past year and all of the teams now use this framework as the standard approach for test execution.
The teams all work on different aspects of the SUT and they have all experienced significant benefits in the use of this scripting framework. However, on closer examination, you have discovered that there are numerous instances where the teams have the same functionality to test but are using different keywords.
One of your objectives for improvement is to create consistency among the teams.
What is the BEST way to handle this situation?

You are testing a major enhancement to an air traffic control user interface. You have use of a sophisticated pre-production test environment, created specifically for large scale automated regression, performance and security testing. The window for regression testing is limited and must successfully conclude, with no major regressions remaining, before the non-functional testing starts.
You have been using the same version of the TAS for the last few releases, each time completing the automated regression test suite in a single overnight run. However, due to the latest enhancements for the SUT, you believe there is a risk that the test suite may no longer complete overnight and therefore delay performance and security testing.
Which option would be the BEST and MOST cost-efficient approach to mitigate this risk?

Your TAS has been running successfully on a Windows/GUI based SUT for some years. The SUT has undergone minimal change over the years to maintain business as usual, deploying six-monthly releases for minor enhancements and bug fixes using a waterfall lifecycle.
The TAS has not changed at all during this period. The current project for the SUT will be using the Scrum methodology to deliver a more modern, competitive, user interface. It is in the release planning stage with an agreed release backlog and set of sprints outlined.
The move from lengthy waterfall releases to shorter sprints has led you to conduct a review of the current TAS to make sure it is robust and fully optimised for the timescale challenges of the new project.
What two steps would be BEST to undertake during the review?
Ensure that new automation code is using the same naming conventions as existing code.
Perform a full regression run in Sprint 1 to identify what improvements could be made to the TAS for future sprints.
Ensure that the TAS is using the latest libraries for the operating system.
Review the functions that act upon the controls for the GUI for possible consolidation.
Involve the test team to see what ease-of-use improvements they would like to see made to the TAS.

What is considered to be an ADVANTAGE of test automation?

How is automation typically applied in a Waterfall lifecycle model?

When choosing an automation tool, which would be the BEST option for automation testers who have programming skills?

Which part of the SUT can be changed to better support test automation?

What would be a goal of test automation in a preproduction environment?