ISTQB and Certification

[olivernz]

Hi all,

It looks like ISTQB is getting another lease on life in some
government agencies at the moment. This is quite an annoying thing for
me and my team here. We do not support or condone ISTQB and their
certification. That would exclude us from being able to deliver
services to these agencies since they mandate ISTQB.

Our basic argument against ISTQB is:

"30hrs of training + 40 multiple choice questions make you a tester
not"

And all companies pushing ISTQB sell it as a certification. Certified
as what? Someone who can learn some vocab? I can list a 5-10 courses
in Wellington that teach you more about testing than ISTQB does in
less time. I think that ISTQB is harmful to our profession because it
sends a message that after 30hrs of training anybody can test.

So far I haven't spoken to one tester (except Rex Black but I don't
think of him as a tester as such) that said ISTQB certification had
any merit bar having a piece of paper. That includes people with and
without ISTQB.

So my question to this forum is, what do you think or what value has
ISTQB really got? Are the government agencies expecting something that
they cannot get from ISTQB certified people (but believe so because
marketing has told them something different)? Should ISTQB be
mandated? Is ISTQB harmful to our industry? What relevance does it
have to NZ?

Regards Oliver

P.S. Please note that this is my view and in this forum I do not
necessarily represent the position of my employer.

[BANDREDDI, SRIKAR (SRIKAR)]

Hi Oliver,

Intresting topic !!

In my opinion doing ISTQB helps everyone to be on the same page regarding the different terms and processes in Testing during SDLC.

I agree with you that : doing ISTQB neither improves your technical skills nor makes you a better tester than the person who has not achieved it.

In a nut shell its to bring everyone on the same page.

Cheers
Srikar

[Prem Nepak - HSA Global]

I also think the same as Srikar does. ISTQB gives a framework for the testers to be on the same page.

Anyone + ISTQB Certification ≠ A Tester

Tester + ISTQB certification = Better Tester

Cheers,
Prem

[Viswanathan Arunachalam]

In ANZ this is a pre-requisite for job seekers either you should be an ISTQB Certified or should be ready to get one once you are placed (SEEK)

[Nizam Abdallah]

Hello All,

CITCON is being held in NZ this year.

This is a FREE conference, limited to 150 people. If you have not heard of this conference in the past visit the website.

http://www.citconf.com/

http://www.citconf.com/nz2010/

Cheers,
Nizam

[Wendy Hiskens]

I am totally with Oliver on this one. If someone is good at studying or memorising things they could easily pass ISTQB without actually knowing anything about testing at all.
When we are looking at hiring testers and I am looking through the CV's I do not even register if they have ISTQB or not. I look for experience. Then in the interviews ask the type of questions around everyday testing not what terminology the person knows.
I do know of people that have passed ITSQB but if you actually asked them to test something, they would have not idea how to write a test plan, test scripts etc......

[bjosman]

The most pleasing thing is that we are actually having this debate! I
think it's helpful and healthy (obviously in a safe but open forum) -
at the very least we may want to look at how this may challenge
ourselves as testers and the skills and knowledge we have!

On Mar 18, 12:13 pm, Viswanathan Arunachalam

> necessarily represent the position of my employer.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Tessa Benzie]

I think you're last comment here, Wendy, suggests that perhaps the issue is not with the idea of the qualification itself but with the execution of the idea.

A lot of professions have recognised qualifications. I think the intention of the ISTQB is to provide testing with the same. If the feeling is that it is not worth the paper it is written on, then perhaps more effort needs to go into making it something worthwhile.

In the meantime, thank goodness there are people like Wendy who can look past the shiny acronyms and see what really matters: experience and skills.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

This email and any attachments contain confidential information which may be subject to legal privilege and copyright.
If you are not the intended recipient you must not peruse, use, distribute or copy the email or attachments.
If it has been received in error please notify us immediately by return email and then delete the message and any accompanying attachments.
Emails are not secure, can be intercepted and altered. AMI Insurance accepts no responsibility for changes
made to this email or to any attachment after it has been transmitted. No viruses were detected in this email
by AMI's virus detection software. AMI cannot guarantee this message or attachment(s) are free from computer viruses or other defects
and will not accept liability for any loss, damage or consequence resulting directly and/or indirectly from their use.

[BANDREDDI, SRIKAR (SRIKAR)]

Yeah .. I highly appreciate that there are infact people who look only at experience and skills rather than the certifications which make your resume glow !!

And I do also love the fact that there are many professional pessimists here in this forum. Please Dont get me wrong with " professional pessimists " because that’s what we are according to Rex Black , A good Tester = professional pessimists (I assume)......

[Richard Robinson]

This is a popular discussion topic. Often, I play the role of test manager, and hire testers for specific projects. I do see "ISTQB qualified/certified" stamped on CV's from time to time, and I know how to read it. Like all things testing, it depends on the context. When hiring, I don't get drawn in by certification, it is just one element in the mix. 

And in the small cities of NZ, certification is 4th on my list of considerations when hiring:

1. Reputation - as soon as I see a name, I call my networks

2. Experience - depth of knowledge, matching of domains to position

3. Personality - I want a tester who is committed and enjoys testing (sometimes not known until the interview)

4. Certification and CV layout - both equally important for the look n feel of the CV

To be honest, I have not seen any other testing certifications popping up on CV's. Does this mean ISTQB has a monopoly in this part of the world? Personally, I think so. Is that a bad thing? Well, who cares and how much? Doesn't certification help to make the testing profession just that bit more professional? Isn't certification still new to the industry. If the guys at ISTQB aren't doing it right, then should we help them?

People without certification are probably very concerned that certification is being valued/requested as a hurdle to a job. People with certification know they also have to demonstrate their knowledge and experience in the interview. They are past caring about certification and are through to the next step. 

I agree with Srikar - When I look at CV's, and I see ISTQB certified, I know that the individual will probably talk the same way I do. This is very important, as there is so much testing lingo out there, it is reassuring to know you don't have to have a lingo-face-off with a recently appointed tester. 

I am studying for my ATA exam. And after doing the ATA course, I decided I needed more experience in particular areas before I sat the exam. I disliked the ISTQB glossary wording, I didn't appreciate the lack of examples to assist with learning, and I was against the exam questions being like a requirements specification prior to a review. 

But I took a breath and decided I was above the banter and ranting. I am now happily learning things the ISTQB way, knowing that the syllabus is a guide only and testing is a craft. It is a craft that can be designed whichever way you like. 

Richard Robinson

Test Manage/Snr Test Analyst

2010/3/18 BANDREDDI, SRIKAR (SRIKAR) <srikar.b...@alcatel-lucent.com>

[Katrina McNicholl]

Well written, my thoughts exactly!

 

Good luck with your ATA exam.. J

[BANDREDDI, SRIKAR (SRIKAR)]

Very well discribed…..

Cheers

Srikar

 

P.S: Good to know that REPUTATION is on your list as number 1 …..

 

 

---

From: software-teste...@googlegroups.com [mailto:software-teste...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard Robinson
Sent: Thursday, 18 March 2010 2:43 p.m.
To: software-teste...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: ISTQB and Certification

 

This is a popular discussion topic. Often, I play the role of test manager, and hire testers for specific projects. I do see "ISTQB qualified/certified" stamped on CV's from time to time, and I know how to read it. Like all things testing, it depends on the context. When hiring, I don't get drawn in by certification, it is just one element in the mix. 

[Sharon Robson]

Here, here...sort of...

What is there to have from  certification??

At the very least is it a common language and an expectation of knowledge.

 

If someone “claims” the knowledge is it easy to assess based on a few questions from the syllabus/glossary.

Can you imagine trying to write a language that is common world-wide? This has to take into account cultural and context differentials...who of us speaks the same terminology from company to company versus country to country.

 

Richard/Katrina...PLEASE don’t be “above the banter” – you guys are what MAKES the industry....weigh in boots and all – but acknowledge that we need a common lexicon, and we need a baseline – BUT it is a baseline for all testers...if you want to change it – change it!

 

The key thing here is the discussion of what makes a “good tester” –is it knowing the terminology, knowing the techniques, or something else?

If it is “the x factor” how do we assess it? Granted – you could pass the foundation certification with a review of the glossary (assuming you review not just read) and you have a reasonable level of knowledge....but what else do we want from a “junior tester”. What value is this? Probably marginal...but if you had training on what the foundation “means” and how to apply it...WOW!! what skills, and how easy to assess (just ask an EP or BVA or Statement Coverage Question during the interview).

 

Can you pass Advanced Level like that??? – I doubt it!

 

The current syllabi and glossary are still evolving – if you want to get involved – do it!

The knowledge should be evolutionary not “hereditary”.

 

Question, challenge, seek, learn....that is the value of testing/certification!

 

Yours in testing/thinking!

 

Sharon

Xxxxxx

[BANDREDDI, SRIKAR (SRIKAR)]

I don’t know how deep can one go contemplating the things mentioned below, but I strongly do agree with Sharon on this point (If someone “claims” the knowledge is it easy to assess based on a few questions from the syllabus/glossary.

Can you imagine trying to write a language that is common world-wide? This has to take into account cultural and context differentials...who of us speaks the same terminology from company to company versus country to country.)

 

Cheers

Srikar

 

 

---

[Oliver Erlewein]

@Richard: Like most of what you said, especially the points in relevance 1-4. But....

ISTQB is probably the only one calling themselves certification at the moment worldwide. Like with everything a monopoly is bad. I don't agree that a group of people just decide what terminology to use. ...And just terminology is like saying I give someone a certification for a car mechanic only by letting him learn all the car's part names.

In 2001 I remember sitting down with my colleagues in Germany trying to gather a standardized vocab for testing. The company I worked for was a pure testing consultancy with 100dreds of testing projects at different customers. This was around our internal vocab and maybe coming up for something for ISEB which our company was involved in defining. After months of work and the foremost test professionals had a go at it it was determined that it would be impossible. A common vocab would just a) cost too much to implement, b) limit customers in their flexibility and c) still be prone to misinterpretation. Doesn't mean we didn't define something though. We all know the pressures sales vs. common sense....

I have an issue in having ~30 hours and 40 questions define our profession. That is bluntly said an insult calling it a certification. And the content that ISTQB has is probably the least necessary part of testing a tester needs. Advanced might finally go somewhere but it's probably still not enough. I want to see courses in critical thinking, courses in testing methodology that train people on how to test and training in Quality Assurance for testers. I want courses where example projects are tested so that I can hire people that know what they are doing and don't have to practice on my project. None of that is part of ISTQB. And I think we're talking 100s of hours here. THAT is what defines a tester. Training & learning to gather experience!

Letting a junior tester do an ISTQB course is probably a waste. He should be shadowing one of your seniors. If I want him to be a good tester I get him to go on a James B or Michael B course. Or I throw him in the deep end and then help and steer him where he needs to go.

Sitting back and saying it'll be OK is exactly what ISTQB needs to become the one and only. Recruiters, managers, PMs,.... can't really discern a testing certification. They equate it to other certifications like Sun/Oracle Java or the Microsoft certifications (which are really tough nuts). So they think ISTQB is good by deduction. Later on they will notice that that might not really be the case. You on the other hand a good tester with 8+ years of experience never got a shot because the recruiter/manager just searched his DB for ISTQB because it was a mandatory requirement and your CV never came up.

One of the questions that might need to be asked is whether and in how far testing can be taught at all (at least to a junior). 

--
Oliver Erlewein
oli...@erlewein.net
http://www.erlewein.net

[Farid Vaswani]

I am always laughing my heart out whenever i hear or read these arguments on ISTQB.

Anyways, my thought here are that:
1- ISTQB is useful when you are applying for jobs as a newbie, so the employer knows that you might not be a great tester as you have never worked before, but at least you will understand the terminology and it serves as a bit of a basework.
2- For experienced testers, it probably serves as a common ground for testing lingo; learn something new, some new techniques from the course in case you were not using that already.
3- But it's a shame when companies/employers ask for ISTQB. It is good to have sometimes, but should not be you top requirement.
4- I recently hired 4 testers and none of them have ISTQB but they are great testers.

I also agree with Tessa's point of view that it gives us a bit of professional outlook but probably the paper itself needs a lot of refining.

Cheers,
Farid

Farid Vaswani
Mob: +64-2 12 4 FARID
http://www.geek4eva.com/

[sharath b]

ISTQB to me is the easiest route for some one to become so called
"tester". It's a shame what these certifications are doing to our
craft. I have tried my best to convince the concerned department in my
organization to stop spending money on such certifications. But have
failed. Anyways,I had prepared a comparative analysis long back to
promote open certifications such as BBST, which to me is a true test
to a tester than fake certificates such as ISTQB or CSTE, I shall post
it later (I am sure I will find it some where on my hard disk :)

-Sharath.B
http://testtotester.blogspot.com/

[olivernz]

Addendum:
http://www.satisfice.com/blog/archives/297
http://testertested.blogspot.com/2009/05/testing-experience-magazine-voice-of.html

Yes, the discussion is still very alive.

Personally i do get more and more disgusted with the base premise of
ISTQB the more I read. Why does it need to be a certification? It
could be just another course. Sorry, I should have said SHOULD. ISTQB
is one opinion of many. It should be treated as such. I can still
comply with all ISTQB mantras and not have a certification. Should I
therefore be disqualified?

ISTQB highlights not good testing but the poor judgement of management
that accepts a certification at face value.

Oliver

[Katrina McNicholl]

Well Oliver you know how to comply with all ISTQB mantras why don't you sit the exam & gain the certification, thus lessening your risk of being judged by what you describe as poor management resulting in reduced frustration with your increasingly growing disgust.

The fact remains those who self educate, explore, giving them a wider tool set of opinions, certifications regards of what kind are simply a demonstration of their understanding of that particular exploratory path. Employers in today's market where jobs are not in abundance, too right have the choice to select those with an open mind willing to self educate in all areas available to them with certifications attached to them or not, this is not poor judgement, it is making a stand that education is available and those that chose to go the extra mile for it may benefit over those who chose to sit on the side line.

Regards
Katrina McNicholl

-----Original Message-----
From: software-teste...@googlegroups.com [mailto:software-teste...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of olivernz
Sent: Tuesday, 23 March 2010 10:15 a.m.
To: Software Testers New Zealand

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to software-testers-new-zealand+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words "REMOVE ME" as the subject.

[Richard Robinson -WLG]

Thanks Karina, well written emotive argument.

I tend to agree that in order to give credibility to the argument against certification (or are we just arguing for/against ISTQB???!!!), you should be certified.

That is the route I am taking. I recognise the recognition, and so am studying one method or 'the most popular' course. This is, of course, balanced up with book-reading, conferences and online testing.

I can understand that highly skilled and experienced testers are now being pressured by the industry to obtain a qualification they believe they already have, crafted by an organisation that are choosing one best way on behalf of the testers, who do not necessarily agree.

It's a hard situation to face up to. I had to. I would suggest all antagonists of ISTQB go out and get the qualification, then decide how it affects them. The more qualified people saying the qualification is worthless will surely add much more steam to your argument, rather than a quiet rant on the sidelines.

Personally, I find the foundation level qualification from ISTQB a bit of an introduction to testing, and I would not ever use it as a basis for employment (hiring, or seeking myself). BUT, in saying that, it was the most accessible course and qualification I was exposed to. I think, therefore, a greater question about a testers quality would be how they have constructed their education opportunities and practised their skills.

This all comes down to doing the triangle test case exercise during an employment interview.

OR asking the tester about the testing books they have read lately

OR asking what testing they do outside of work

OR what testing 'experts' they follow or respect

The list goes on...

Lets put some positive focus on the good stuff, and forget about if someone has chosen to acquire a qualification or not.

After all, is there one best was to do testing? I don't think so. You soon find that out in the field when trying to apply IEEE 829, or ISO 9126 on every project, large and small.

I would like to know the 10-15 other testing courses available that are not ISTQB... Lets educate everyone about the opportunities. Personally, I think the best one is the public library, utest.com, blog sites and networking.

After you have chosen to be a professional tester, testing actually becomes quite exciting!

Richard Robinson
Snr T&Q Analyst
Wellington
Richard....@nzte.govt.nz

-----Original Message-----
From: software-teste...@googlegroups.com [mailto:software-teste...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Katrina McNicholl
Sent: Tuesday, 23 March 2010 11:07 a.m.
To: software-teste...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: ISTQB and Certification

Regards
Katrina McNicholl

Oliver

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

***********************************************************************************
This e-mail message, together with any attachments, is for the intended recipient only and may not be disclosed to any other person. If you are not the intended recipient and you have received or seen this message through an error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the email from your system. Unauthorised use or disclosure of the message, or the information it contains, may be unlawful.

New Zealand Trade and Enterprise accepts no responsibility for changes made to this email or to any attachments after transmission from New Zealand Trade and Enterprise. The information contained in this email, together with any attachments, does not necessarily represent the official view of New Zealand Trade and Enterprise. It is your responsibility to check this email and any attachments for viruses.

***********************************************************************************

[olivernz]

@Katrina: I have sat the prep for the ISTQB foundation and decided not
to do the exam (please not that I did not look at the advanced stuff
yet). I think lots of the prep was excellent but I disagreed with a
lot of the ISTQB syllabus as being incorrect and/or up for
interpretation. I am not worried about myself. I'll always get a job
and if someone says the must have ISTQB they are not the right shop
for me anyway.

I am concerned about testers thinking they need ISTQB to get a job and
customers thinking they get a tester if applicants are ISTQB
certified. Both cases are not true in my opinion Only if you add
experience might that be mitigated which leads me to wonder what I'd
need an ISTQB certification for. ISTQB is not treated as

"demonstration of their understanding of that particular exploratory

path". It is made out to be THE certification.

I don't mind that people want to know what the course contains. But
it's just a course like any other testing course with the same mandate
and validity. What I am opposing is calling it a certification,
thereby misguiding less knowing people into the impression ISTQB
certified means I can test, which strongly doubt. Add to that the very
clear stance of ISTQB worldwide that tries and sell that ISTQB is the
be all of testing. In the wider sense ISTQB is education but is it the
right or proper one? I'm also not saying I can do it better or there
is a solution out there. ISTQB has put itself out there so it has to
withstand criticism. So far it hasn't in any way. The main mantra
followed is bla-bla-bla thousand people have done it so it must be
good.

Even Richard R. has to admit (and others above have alluded to that
too) that he'd not use ISTQB for hiring or employing. So what I ask
you is the point of certification then? Certification's main reason is
to be the basis of proving ability. So we're saying "ISTQB is nice and
everyone should do it but we'll just ignore it because it really
doesn't measure up".

And that's exactly my point! I really wish there was a Testing
Certification that would really mean something. Something that I could
be sure that the person has grasped the grass roots levels of testing.
That I could employ and be happy with. ISTQB is not it. Maybe it can
be a foundation for further development but it does definitely need
that.

Richard also goes on to say it is the most accessible education on
testing to get. That's sad and I think ISTQB is certainly affecting
other good educational courses from emerging. But there are luckily
still opportunities around. (@Richard) Stanz in general is a good
conference to attend and courses by Robert Sabourin, James/John Bach,
Michael Bolton, Cem Kaner (online), Elizabeth Hendrickson and lots of
others that are of local origin. I must say that SoftEd does warrant
honorable mention here because they try their best to keep open minded
to both/all sides.

Lets keep open and not lock us into a system and if we do do that
let's make 150% sure it's the right one we all can compromise on. My
call of action to companies and employers would be to state "We prefer
ISTQB training" (if they really need to or just drop it) instead of
"ISTQB mandatory".

Oliver

On Mar 23, 11:06 am, Katrina McNicholl <Katrina.McNich...@ami.co.nz>
wrote:

> Well Oliver you know how to comply with all ISTQB mantras why don't you sit the exam & gain the certification, thus lessening your risk of being judged by what you describe as poor management resulting in reduced frustration with your increasingly growing disgust.
>
> The fact remains those who self educate, explore, giving them a wider tool set of opinions, certifications regards of what kind are simply a demonstration of their understanding of that particular exploratory path. Employers in today's market where jobs are not in abundance, too right have the choice to select those with an open mind willing to self educate in all areas available to them with certifications attached to them or not, this is not poor judgement, it is making a stand that education is available and those that chose to go the extra mile for it may benefit over those who chose to sit on the side line.
>
> Regards
> Katrina McNicholl
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: software-teste...@googlegroups.com [mailto:software-teste...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of olivernz
> Sent: Tuesday, 23 March 2010 10:15 a.m.
> To: Software Testers New Zealand
> Subject: Re: ISTQB and Certification
>

> Addendum:http://www.satisfice.com/blog/archives/297http://testertested.blogspot.com/2009/05/testing-experience-magazine-...

> ___________________________________________________________________________­________________________________________________________________

[Tessa Benzie]

Oliver, it sounds like the passion I can hear in your posts would be well suited to taking action to improve the value of certification for testers. I value your input in a forum like this to invoke such discussion. I wonder if you should take it to a wider audience and actually get some cogs turning to make certification valuable for our profession. As Sharon alluded to; it is our industry, it is up to us.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[Oliver Erlewein]

@Tessa: As much as I want a certification (to make it easy for me) as
much I think it's not easily done. Maybe I should partake but better
and more senior people than I have tried and failed miserably so that
is a bit discouraging. I have also found it very hard on myself when I
did help with defining some of the German stuff for ISEB. So I might
have to give it a pass at this point. Never mind that I have a full
calendar of work to do.

What I am doing is trying to present at conferences and share my know
how (flawed or not) where I can. That in my opinion has a much more
direct impact on the testers around me. I also support several open
source tools with feedback and community help (mostly in the
performance testing field).

Additionally I throw in questions like these on forums to spark
discussion in the community instead of leaving it up to the elect
fews. ;-)

Although this discussion seems emotional and harsh I think it has it's
merits and should be had. I do keep an open mind and I can be
convinced. Just not easily.

--

[Richard Robinson -WLG]

@Oliver
Thanks for the list of conferences and speakers you value. I rate my list of acclaimed speakers and resources against others, and enjoyed reading the names on your list.

I was at STANZ last year, and it gave my testing career a huge push. This was due to networking mostly and some 'game time' with JB. I was so impressed by the ways James challenged my mind to think. I learned as much about my learning, problem solving and testing style as I did about testing. I think they go hand in hand.

Thank you for your comments, I agree with most of them and hopefully we have engaged a few more people to the debate to help further develop our industry.

Personally, I try to attend as many of the following:
- formal testing courses
- ANZTB presentations
- STANZ
- NZCS/TPN presentations
And any interesting IT presentations like the occasional Twilight Seminar, or MS preso. That's all I can find in Welly. Does anyone know of any other presentations going on from time to time?

Cheers
Richard R

***********************************************************************************

[BANDREDDI, SRIKAR (SRIKAR)]

@All:
Some points mentioned by Oliver are very true. I like the fact which he mentioned saying:

My call of action to companies and employers would be to state "We prefer ISTQB training" (if they really need to or just drop it) instead of "ISTQB mandatory".

I think this needs to be clear in the minds of all recruiters worldwide that doing ISTQB certification will not make someone a better tester. Testing is all about intuition and your passion to continually motivate yourself for a better quality product. And this in my opinion comes through experience as you make mistakes and learn more day by day .

@Tessa:

Yes there are many suggestions in which ISTQB can improve their course .....give more practise sessions (currently there are a few , but its not enough) , and real life situations where Testers can learn the basics and try to work on it thus becoming more intuitive.....

Please correct me if am wrong.

Cheers
Srikar

-----Original Message-----
From: software-teste...@googlegroups.com [mailto:software-teste...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Tessa Benzie
Sent: Tuesday, 23 March 2010 3:12 p.m.
To: software-teste...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: ISTQB and Certification

[olivernz]

@Richard:
I also encourage testers to go out and partake in non-testing courses.
Be it development techniques, Agile/Scrum, business analyst
presentations and technology presentations. All that has relevance and
inspires thinking and critical thinking. There's lots of free or next
to free presentations in Wellington. So there is really no reason not
to attend.

The TPN (www.nzcs.co.nz) is a good source of information. They also
have big-name speakers presenting.

Things like Barcamps are excellent. The next one I believe is the
Google Barcamp on Thursday. Barcamps are next to form free conferences
which are usually free or for minimum cost.

One thing I can't encourage enough is the contact to testers from all
over the world. Be it Rex Black or the guy next door. That is what
brings you forward in this profession. Challenge them or get them to
answer your questions. You will find they are usually open and
approachable (at least in NZ ;-)

On Mar 23, 4:34 pm, Richard Robinson -WLG

> >> Addendum:http://www.satisfice.com/blog/archives/297http://testertested.blogspo......

> ...
>
> read more »

[BANDREDDI, SRIKAR (SRIKAR)]

If any one from the ISTQB is following this forum ,here are a few suggestions to make the course more interesting.

1)3 days , and so much material dumped in ones head can be a little overwhelming. I would suggest to focus on the important things which play a significant role in the daily life of a tester.
2)There should be a entire day for just practising the techniques learnt, like giving all a real application and asking them to test it and thus improving the thinking (critical thinking) of a tester.

Best Regards,

Srikar Bandreddi,
Systems & Applications Integration,
Alcatel-Lucent ,
The Todd Building,
Level 4 , 95 Customhouse Quay,
PO Box 6011,Wellington,New Zealand,
E-mail: srikar.b...@alcatel-lucent.com
Phone: +64 4 803 7532
Mobile: +64 21 02978980

This email may contain privileged/confidential information. You may not copy or disclose this email to anyone without the written permission of the sender. If you have received this email in error please kindly delete this message and notify the sender. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily the opinions of the employer.
This email and any attached files should be scanned to detect viruses. No liability will be accepted by the employer for loss or damage (whether caused by negligence or not) as a result of email transmission.

[bjosman]

Hi Srikar,

As you may remember, I work for Software Education (www.softed.com )
and we are a training provider. ISTQB sets the syllabus and gives
recommendations on the timings, they don't create the training
material. They falls to the training provider to either create a
course based on the syllabus or license course material that has been
accredited by ISTQB.

Software Education license courses from Rex Black (Software testing
foundations, Advanced Test Analyst and Advanced Test Manager) that
meet the ISTQB syllabus/timing guidelines. Originally, Software
Testing Foundations was a 4 day course which meant more time for home
work, additional learning and alot less *brain cram*).

However, the market turned around and said we want 3 days and so the
course was shorten to 3 days.

In essence, ISTQB set the syllabus which has some valuable learnings
in it. The training providers either write or license the course where
appropriate.

The thoughts you have are excellent thoughts and I can't help but
agree with Richard and Oliver et al who have discussed other ways a
tester can upskill. Conferences, Weekend Testers, TPN, Barcamp, the
internet - lots of opportunities availiable which help compliment the
things that a tester may pick up on say the Software Testing
Foundations course.

Please feel free to contact me direct to further discuss your ideas.
They may not be picked up in an *ISTQB* course but they may have a
different place to be utilised.

Thanks for the comments and discussions on this thread, it has been
most valuable!

AND to quote Oliver:-

"One thing I can't encourage enough is the contact to testers from
all
over the world. Be it Rex Black or the guy next door. That is what
brings you forward in this profession. Challenge them or get them to
answer your questions. You will find they are usually open and
approachable (at least in NZ ;-)"

I have and so have others in this group. If we share, then we all
grow!

Your in testing!

Brian
On Mar 23, 5:46 pm, "BANDREDDI, SRIKAR (SRIKAR)"

<srikar.bandre...@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:
> If any one from the ISTQB is following this forum ,here are a few suggestions to make the course more interesting.
>
> 1)3 days , and so much material dumped in ones head can be a little overwhelming. I would suggest to focus on the important things which play a significant role in the daily life of a tester.
> 2)There should be a entire day for just practising the techniques learnt, like giving all a real application and asking them to test it and thus improving the thinking (critical thinking) of a tester.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Srikar Bandreddi,
> Systems & Applications Integration,
> Alcatel-Lucent ,
> The Todd Building,
> Level 4 , 95 Customhouse Quay,
> PO Box 6011,Wellington,New Zealand,

> E-mail: srikar.bandre...@alcatel-lucent.com

> > Addendum:http://www.satisfice.com/blog/archives/297http://testertested.blogspo......

> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -

[bjosman]

AND it saying that, Software Education also runs other testing courses
that are more practical based (Web Based Testing) or approach specfic
(Agile Testing, User Acceptance Testing) or masterclasses (Rapid
Software Testing - James Bach).

Have a look on http://www.softed.com/Courses/software-testing.aspx and
you'll see a range of different courses available for testers which
goes back to a point earlier that there are many different learning
opportunities, forums, communities and courses available!

[BANDREDDI, SRIKAR (SRIKAR)]

Thank you so much brian for the information and clarifying my assumptions. May be approach specific might be more appropriate for me .Will have a look into the course and get back to you if I need more information.
Your time is really appreciated.

Cheers
Srikar

P.S: My question to you would be , how can we influence our employers to take the initiative into such practical based courses when their mind set is completely on ISTQB certification ?

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to software-testers-new-zealand+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words "REMOVE ME" as the subject.

[olivernz]

The influence must come from us testers. Only by actively opposing and
being vocal about it will things change. I have quite a bit of success
with that. But in doing that you are exposed.

The problem I see is that the perceived lure of "easy" employment
still gets junior testers. The more senior testers have (rightly so)
other things on their mind than progressing the profession and caring
for things like ISTQB discussions (please forgive my blatant
generalisations). It is them though that form the main influence. They
have to drop their stance of "ISTQB - why not? I don't care."
attitude. That is like not-voting, thereby supporting the incumbent.
So not taking a stance will always empower ISTQB.

At my company we do not send our testers on ISTQB courses. We rather
send them to the courses that train practical application of
methodology but I am now finding that our customers are forcing our
hand. The sad thing is that our customers are hurting themselves by
doing so. I now have to waste time & money on a certification that I'd
have rather invested in something that directly helps the specific
issues my customer has.

One fallacy is also that the customers tend to write "ISTQB required"
thinking that means something. They then completely miss out the step
where they do their due-dilligence about what and how they want to
test. It degrades their test-requirements. What I try and do is
something that sounds similar to this:

Customer: "I needs ISTQB certified testers!"

me: "So what is it exactly you want tested and what methodology do you
want to use?"

Customer: "We'll.....the ISTQB stuff."

me: "Yes, but what stuff thereof and how does that translate to your
organisation/project?"

Customer: " ..... "

I don't really have discussions like that because this is in the field
of sales and there I just say "no-comment". But this is really the
discussion that I am missing in vendor-client relationships and even
organisation-internally. ISTQB is the really good thing to obfuscate
missing due-diligence.

Luckily it's not yet as bad as that and the ISTQB requirement is one
of several. So you can argue and get around it. What I see though is
that the trend has changed towards it.

So I'd ask those testers and managers out there that don't believe in
ISTQB or couldn't care either-or to be more vocal and open about their
stance. I for example wouldn't be championing this if I saw that it
was just me that had issues with ISTQB. My experience is that once you
start scraping away the surface there is doubt in next to every tester
I discuss this with.

So Srikar...the best way is to tell your managers/stakeholders what
you think of ISTQB.

Funnily enough my colleague just sent me this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_think
. Have a read ;-)

On Mar 24, 10:59 am, "BANDREDDI, SRIKAR (SRIKAR)"

> ...
>
> read more »

[olivernz]

Just got tweeted this link. I think it nicely sub-surmises the
situation in my opinion. I just couldn't fit it into such nice words.

http://blog.objectmentor.com/articles/2010/04/27/certification-dont-waste-your-time

Cheers Oliver