Yesterday, there took place an event in a "pair competition" format or a public discussion, or even a "QA Battle"! This time with my participation. At
this 19th QAClubKiev meeting, I tried to convince the audience and my
dear opponent, Alexandra Kovalyova, that ISTQB Foundation Level
certification is more harmful than useful. And in her turn, Alexandra tried to do the opposite.
VIDEO: The first 42m here (in Ukrainian)
If we try to determine the winner of this "QA battle" by the number of people who surrounded me and Alexander after the closing word, then I won (with a slight overtake ) :-)
But to make the picture complete, it's worth to mention that a small crowd of juniors gathered around me asking me "How can we become a good tester without ISTQB?" and "What are the test books to read?". Instead, Alexandra's group was of already experienced testers, and the questions were (as far as I've heard) more about ISTQB Advanced Level and Test Management.
It is difficult to say whether our arguments forced anybody to change their minds, but at least it was interesting to hear the arguments "pro"/"contra" and to bring the discussion into public space. Of course, "wisecracks" were awsome from both sides, and both from speakers and from the audience. Epic holywar was epic indeed.
A little bit of the argument.
The main points of Alexandra and other supporters of certification of testers at the foundation level of ISTQB were:
Bad things about ISTQB from Alexandra, a supporter of ISTQB (lol):
In general, I really loved the party! The format chosen was very good, sincerely grateful to Marina Shevchenko, Oleksandr Maydaniuk and Ciklum for the hosting!
VIDEO: The first 42m here (in Ukrainian)
If we try to determine the winner of this "QA battle" by the number of people who surrounded me and Alexander after the closing word, then I won (with a slight overtake ) :-)
But to make the picture complete, it's worth to mention that a small crowd of juniors gathered around me asking me "How can we become a good tester without ISTQB?" and "What are the test books to read?". Instead, Alexandra's group was of already experienced testers, and the questions were (as far as I've heard) more about ISTQB Advanced Level and Test Management.
It is difficult to say whether our arguments forced anybody to change their minds, but at least it was interesting to hear the arguments "pro"/"contra" and to bring the discussion into public space. Of course, "wisecracks" were awsome from both sides, and both from speakers and from the audience. Epic holywar was epic indeed.
A little bit of the argument.
The main points of Alexandra and other supporters of certification of testers at the foundation level of ISTQB were:
- The ISTQB Body of Knowledge / Syllabus is a source of general knowledge of testing and related areas.
- It contains all the concepts from customers, companies, employees and community that allow you to read the silabus and rest assured your knowledge is relevant.
- This certification guarantees that the person has the same understanding of the basic concepts.
- ISTQB is a good label in your CV.
- Many contradictory definitions in Syllabus
- It does not make sense to go through certification even at the Foundation Level, having less than one year of work as a tester, or among testers
- Business often perceives the ISTQB as a standard or a framework that you can simply "implement". But that's not the case! This is the Knowledge Base!
Instead, in my part of the discussion, I pointed out the following:
- To prove that you can program, you sit down and program. To prove that you can test, you sit down and test. The Certification of the "baseline" does not guarantee that you are able to test.
- "Brining up the definition" does not mean that everyone agrees with the one. A lot of definitions in Syllabus are ambiguous or simply artificial (are not found anywhere in the wild). What is the benefit of them? It is better to read intelligent books, isn't it?
- ISTQB can not unify the terminology, because those who do not know about ISTQB will always be the majority - they are the people from the application area. And testers, above all, need to learn their language in order to better understand the business.
- An attempt to combine different areas of knowledge has resulted in, as I put it, a "definition bin". Without the context, these "definitions" are worthless.
- It does not solve contradictions in terminology. It moves the responsibility for the "wrong" terminology to those who are not familiar with the ISTQB.
- It is worth reading to see the words spoken by testers. But you should not learn it by heart. And it's better to search for the meanings of these terms in other sources. Even in here: https://www.guru99.com/
In general, I really loved the party! The format chosen was very good, sincerely grateful to Marina Shevchenko, Oleksandr Maydaniuk and Ciklum for the hosting!
Of course, I thank my vis-á-vis Alexandra Kovalyova for a pleasantly high level of discussion and her endurance :-) PS Very soon, qaclubkiev will have all the materials of the meeting, including a presentation, where there will be a list of recommended books from both of us. But
for the especially impatient ones here are few books (especially number
1), to which I really advise you to spend a couple of bucks saved from
certification:
- Perfect Software: And Other Illusions about Testing Gerald M. Weinberg
- Lessons Learned in Software Testing: A Context-Driven Approach by Cem Kaner, James Bach and Bret Pettichord
- Exploratory Software Testing by James A. Whittaker
Немає коментарів:
Дописати коментар