CTFL-AcT Exam Dumps : ISTQB Certified Tester - Acceptance Testing (CT-AcT)

Comprehensive Detailed Explanation (Approx. 200 words):

Acceptance criteria should focus on business-relevant outcomes that are specific, testable, and observable. In this user story, the goal is to validate that the registration functionality is available and behaves as expected.

Let's analyze each proposition:

i) “A registration form is displayed on the screen.”

→ Valid. It is observable, specific, and directly aligned with the user story.

ii) “The form is written in the Groovy language; the cursor is initially set on the ‘login’ field...”

→ Invalid as acceptance criteria. It contains implementation details (e.g., “Groovy language”) irrelevant to business stakeholders. Also, low-level UI behavior like cursor position is overly technical and not a business-driven criterion.

iii) “I cannot register myself if the login I choose is used by another player.”

→ Valid. It defines system behavior based on a business rule (unique login) and is testable.

iv) “After successful registration process I am informed about it by an e-mail.”

→ Valid. It describes a user-visible outcome after registration, which is observable and testable.

Correct answer: D. only i), iii), and iv) are well-written acceptance criteria.

Exact Reference – ISTQB CTFL Acceptance Testing Syllabus (Section 1.3.2):

“Acceptance criteria must describe the externally visible and verifiable system behavior, excluding implementation details.”

The goal here is to achieve full decision coverage (also known as branch coverage), which means each decision point in the process must evaluate to both TRUE and FALSE at least once during testing.

From the BPMN ATM withdrawal model, we identify two key decisions:

Is the balance ≥ $100?

If yes, is receipt = YES?

To achieve full decision coverage:

One test must evaluate decision 1 as TRUE and another as FALSE.

If decision 1 is TRUE, then decision 2 must be exercised both ways (receipt = YES and NO), but for minimal decision coverage, one path through decision 2 is enough.

Analyzing test cases:

Test 1 (balance = $100, receipt = YES): decision 1 = TRUE, decision 2 = TRUE

Test 2 (balance = $99): decision 1 = FALSE

These two tests ensure:

Decision 1 evaluated TRUE (Test 1) and FALSE (Test 2)

Decision 2 evaluated at least once (receipt = YES in Test 1)

Thus, Test 1 and Test 2 form the minimal set for full decision coverage.

Other options:

C and D are redundant for the minimal set.

A includes an extra test not needed for minimal decision coverage.

Answer: B. Test 1, Test 2

In situations where a team is demotivated or struggling with vision and direction, it's effective to use visualization workshops that help the team reflect on progress and visualize a path forward.

Option B describes a metaphorical workshop using a staircase to represent the project's journey — this is known as the "Stairway Retrospective" or "Timeline Workshop". It provides a shared mental model, identifies milestones, and encourages discussion around past progress and future steps. It's ideal for reigniting motivation and clarifying direction — which aligns with the issue described in the question.

Other options:

A can spark debate but may not be constructive or motivating in a stagnation scenario.

C may foster team bonding but doesn’t directly address project direction or vision.

D focuses only on future milestones and lacks the reflective component essential when a team feels stuck.