For several years, I've been actively engaged in making and producing podcasts. There's a certain amount of commitment and resources needed to make a podcast work, and there are ways to share and communicate it that are considered fairly standard. In short, if your podcast isn't in iTunes (or more correctly now, Apple podcasts) then it doesn't exist. That's not entirely true, but it does make podcast discovery a little more challenging.
Still, there are periods where you want to do something that's a little more focused, to get information out to a target group quickly, and that may not require having a long shelf life. I've started an initiative that does exactly that, and in the process, we made some choices that I think you all may find interesting. At the very least, they may be a cautionary tale or a model that you may wish to try yourselves.
Claire Moss and I are recording a series of short, targeted podcasts that are meant to help focus on the upcoming AST CAST Conference in Nashville, Tennessee this year. This podcast is called The AST CASTcast, and in many ways, it's like many other podcasts, and in a few ways, it's different. As a way to quickly get content out to people, rather than produce a podcast that would be pushed to podcast syndication systems, we decided to go with an approach that used YouTube. YouTube is an interesting platform choice, in that it's ubiquitous, and it's easy to access and upload to. It does have a few challenges, in that it's not an audio-only medium. Every file has to be a video file. If we were to record a show with video, then that would be easy, but we are not able to guarantee all of our guests can record with video, and rather than leave them out, we decided to make an audio podcast.
That's great, you may say, but YouTube is a video platform. How do you make an audio-only recording available as a video file? We opted to use a service called TunesToTube. The service lets you upload an audio file, and then an image file (in our case, we chose to make a show card with show info and pictures of participants). These then get combined into a video file and uploaded to YouTube. If you use the free version, you will have a watermark appear that says the TunesToTube service was used to encode the video.
The process is pretty straightforward:
Go to the TunesToTube.com website
Log into your YouTube account
Upload the audio file you wish to use for your podcast.
Upload the picture(s) you would like to use to represent your video (you can also type in text and make some selections so that you have a video title, etc. if you don't want to load an image)
Put in the title, description, and tags as you want them to appear.
Upload the file to YouTube
As stated, this would be a great way to give a test drive to a podcast or to make it available as an alternative to a regularly published podcast feed. The advantages are that going from finished audio to available to listen is fast. Another plus to using YouTube is that it makes the content embeddable, as I'm doing in this post here. The source video is on YouTube, but anyone who wants to include it on a blog post or a share can do so easily, and it's immediately accessible via desktop, phone or tablet, as long as the device in question can play YouTube videos. The downside to this approach is that it does require the user to use YouTube and stream video files. Granted, they are not tremendously larger than the audio file, but there is an overhead, and thus, it deserves to be mentioned. Also, it's not as easily downloaded as a regular podcast, but there are methods to do that.
In any event, we hope you enjoy the AST CASTCast while we are posting them in the upcoming weeks and months. As always, I appreciate feedback and comments about what we are doing :).
I sit here now in Grand Rapids, Michigan, after what has been a rather "eventful" day. It started with a very early morning flight, which was delayed due to mechanical trouble, which turned my 90 minute layover in Dallas into a 13 minute layover and a mad dash to get off the plane, get onto the SkyTrack train, get to my gate, and while gasping for breath answer "yes, I'm Michael Larsen, I'm here, please don't give up my seat" I now sit in a hotel room waiting for the logistics of the upcoming weekend and majority of m=next week to take place.
Since 2011, I have been a member of the Board of Directors with the Association for Software Testing. On Wednesday, we will read off a new list of board members, and for the first time in four years, my name will not be one of them. I explained why this was the case a couple of months back, but it's becoming much more real now. This CAST in Grand Rapids will be a "last hurrah" of sorts.
First, I want to say that I have enjoyed my time in this role, but like all things, I believe it is important that others step up and that those of us who have been here awhile be willing to step aside. The organization has new challenges and it deserves new energy from new players.
There are several great candidates vying for positions on the board. Currently, we have seven people running for three seats. That's exciting to see, because it means several people want to make a difference. It's also bittersweet, because it means four excellent people will not get to serve this year. to those who do not make it on the board this year, I heartily encourage you to run again.
I've often joked that being on the board is a bit like being in the military during war time. Most of the time, there are low level details that always need to be taken care of, punctuated by moments of high excitement and, often, accompanies by sheer terror. Fortunately those moments are only occasional, but they do happen.
Ben Yaroch posted a tweet today that really does draw the distinction, both of what is required, and why I feel the time has come for me to step aside:
There's lots of great ideas. We've had many of them. Great ideas by themselves, though, don't accomplish anything. They need people ready, willing and able to roll up their sleeves and do the hard work. I don't think there has ever been an issue with the willing. Ready and able have proven to be genuine challenges at times.
There have been some great blog posts from several of the candidates as to what they hope to be able to do to help AST meet its vision going forward. I encourage everyone to have a good look at the candidates and see what their proposals are, and how their proposals can help shape and even change what AST is and does. Note that the Board is not made of of people that tell others what to do. When you decide to run for the Board, you are saying that you ware willing to roll up your sleeves and be the one "doing the doing". Often, that can be more difficult than it sounds, and progress can be very slow at times, but if persistent, it can and does happen.
"When considering the candidates for Board positions this year, look at the candidates’ Biographies. Read them carefully. Google them. Google their organizations. If you are at CAST, look for them before voting and chat with them in the hall. Ask them (in person or by email) “In what way will you do the things you said you want AST to do? How will you go about making that happen?” Then look for the people with a track record of doing things. It is people who do things that we, as an organization, need leading us."
For the past four years I have had the joys & frustrations of working with an organization, as well as serving on its Board of Directors. That organization is the Association for Software Testing (AST). The positions I’ve served in for those four years include three years as the organization's treasurer, and this past year (so far) as its president. These years have been filled with successes and challenges, satisfying goals completed and frustrating loose ends still to be resolved.
In August, at the Conference for the Association for Software Testing (CAST), those candidates who wish to run, or who are up for re-election, will put their hats in the ring and make a case as to why they should be selected. Earlier this year, I anticipated I would be creating a post asking for your support. Instead, I am putting this post together to encourage others to run and get involved, as I will not be seeking a third term.
Why am I making this decision, and why am I talking about it now?
First, I want to give those who want to run for the board a chance to get their names out and be considered. Second, I want to discuss some of the things being involved with the board entails, and how you can be effective or hope to be effective. Third, I believe that becoming entrenched within an organization for too long can be a hindrance to moving forward, whether intentional or not.
Due to circumstances in both my work and personal life, and the time and attention needed in areas important to me (my family and my career), it is clear the time and attention I can provide to AST, in the role of a board member or executive officer, is no longer sufficient to be effective. To make the time to be effective, I will have to pull away from two critical areas. My kids are at a key point in transitioning from teenage years to adulthood. My work environment has changed due to the death of my director. I've stepped in to fill many of the roles he played. In short, the conditions that made it possible for me to be effective as a board member are not there now. To keep serving in this capacity would be a disservice to the organization. I want to make sure that the work I care about regarding AST can be accomplished. I still want to be part of that mission, but I have to be realistic as to what I can offer and do.
For the first three years of my involvement, I was the treasurer. That meant I had to make sure our financial house was in order. Making sure the money that came in and the money that went out was accounted for was my primary responsibility. Once you get a handle on it, you can do it reliably and have time to think about other things. During the years I was treasurer, we made great strides in breaking out where our money was going, and how to use that money effectively to help local and international initiatives. I still think the AST Grant Program is one of the best kept secrets of our organization. It’s there, but only a handful of people take advantage of it.
Three times a year, we gather together as an in-person group to discuss the business of AST. We have done our best to pick a central location to minimize traveling costs. For the past four years, that has meant the U.S. midwest or east coast. One of those tri-annual board meetings also coincides with CAST. Anyone who runs will need to be cool with being able to travel for those meetings.
Getting seven people to agree to a decision can be daunting. While we can reach consensus on a number of areas, sometimes we just don’t have the bandwidth or the agreement to put those items into motion. We have been criticized for moving too slowly. The fact is, in some areas, we do move slowly. We are aware that we represent a large and diverse membership. No decision we make will please everyone. Still, we try our best to make choices and develop positions that will benefit the entire organization, rather than be of benefit to only a small number of members. Additionally, if we must make a choice, we will choose not do something if the alternative is to do something poorly.
Once a month, we get together for a monthly conference call to discuss business that needs to be moved forward, and making the time to have that call happen each month is important. Outside of these calls, and triannual in-person meetings, the work of the organization needs to get done and moved forward. Often, real life interferes with that happening.
If you are interpreting my words here as saying “those who wish to run need to have both vision and bandwidth to make sure things get done”, you have interpreted correctly. If you are reading this and thinking I am dissuading others from getting involved, that is the opposite of my intention. I encourage those who do want to run for the board to do so, and do it loudly! While there have been stressful moments, it’s also been fun, and I’ve been really excited about what we have been able to do. I think CAST is one of the best software testing conferences out there. The vision of AST and the members of the board and its various committees make it possible. I think that BBST is a very valuable series of classes. I’ve enjoyed being an instructor these past several years. Even though I will not be on the board after November, 2015, my involvement with BBST will continue. I intend to keep teaching, and aiming to help improve the process and delivery of that teaching.
My recommendation for those interested in running would be to look at something AST does, and demonstrate how you can help sustain and/or improve what we are doing. If AST is not doing something you think we should be doing, make a case as to why you feel you can make that possible, and how you can help make that happen. In the past, those who've been elected had a goal they wanted to see achieved, and they had the energy to see it through. If this fits you, I wholeheartedly encourage you to see our Election page, and make a bid to run for AST's Board of Directors.
I want to thank the AST membership for four memorable years. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to serve in this capacity. I’m leaving the board, but I am not leaving AST, nor will I stop focusing on initiatives I feel are important. I must adjust to current realities, and serving on the board is a commitment of time, talent and energy. There’s a great group of people already there, and we will need great talent going forward. You could be one of those people.
Today I sent the following message to the members of the Education Special Interest Group of the Association for Software Testing:
Hello everyone!
Three years ago at this time, I took on a challenge that no one else wanted to take on. I realized that there was a lot at stake if someone didn't [added: the AST BBST classes might cease], and thus a practitioner, with little academic experience, took over a role that Cem Kaner had managed for several years. I stepped into the role of being the Education SIG Chair, and through that process, I learned a lot, we as a SIG have done a lot, and some interesting projects have come our way to be part of (expansion of AST BBST classes and offerings, SummerQAmp materials, PerScholas mentoring program, etc.). It's been a pleasure to be part of these opportunities and represent the members of AST in this capacity.
However, there is a time and a season for all things, and I feel that my time as an effective Chair has reached its end. As of July 15, 2014, I have officially resigned as the Chair of the Education Special Interest Group. This does not mean that I will stop being involved, or stop teaching BBST courses, or stop working on the SummerQAmp materials. In fact, it's [my] desire to work on those things that has prompted me to take this step. Even I and my hyper-involved self has to know his limitations.
I have asked Justin Rohrman to be the new Chair of the Education Special Interest Group, and he has graciously accepted. Justin is more than capable to do the job. In many ways, I suspect he will do a better job than I have. I intend to work with him over the next few weeks to provide an orderly transition of roles and authority so that he can do what I do, and ultimately, so I can stop doing some of it :).
Justin, congratulations, and thank you. EdSIG, I believe wholeheartedly you shall be in good hands.
Regards,
Michael Larsen
Outgoing EdSIG Chair
To everyone I've had the chance to work with in this capacity over the past three years, thank you. thank you for your patience as I learned how to make everything work, for some definition of "work". Thank you for helping me learn and dare to try things I wasn't aware I could even do. Most of all, thanks for teaching me more than I am sure I have ever taught any of you over these past three years.
As I said above, I am not going away. I am not going to stop teaching the BBST courses, but this will give me more of an opportunity to be able to teach them, or assist others in doing so, which is a more likely outcome, I think. It also frees me up so I can give more attention to participating in programs that matter a great deal to me, such as SummerQAmp and PerScholas. As I said above, I believe Justin will be fantastic, and I'll be just a phone call or email message away from help if he should need it ;).
This is going to be very much a niche post. For many, this won't make a lot of sense. For others, it will make a great deal of sense, and it's all of you that it will make sense to that I am hoping will read and consider this post.
Members of the Association for Software Testing, CAST 2013 will be starting just under two weeks from today. I will be there. I will be speaking, helping out where I can, and, I hope, acting as a positive representative of this organization.
This year also marks the end of my inaugural term as a member of the Board of Directors. I am up for re-election. I have considered why I should run for the Board again, and why I should ask each and every one of you to give me your support and your vote.
Short version:
I am running once again, and I am asking for your vote of support for a second term.
Longer Version:
I have enjoyed interacting with all of you over the past two years. I've served in the role of being the "BBST Headmaster", keeping track of the books for the organization as the Association's Treasurer, and working as the Chair of the Education Special Interest Group, most notably with the group of dedicated individuals who have helped compile and curate the materials that are developing to be the basis of educational modules for SummerQAmp.
I'll be blunt. I'm not an academic. I'm not a consultant. I'm a software tester. A practitioner. I'm an everyday, regular person who works for a regular company. I'm also one who wants to see our profession, craft, discipline, "call it what you will" grow, develop and flourish.
I enjoy being actively involved in those efforts, and being part of the Board of Directors allows me the opportunity to try and see these initiatives, and others, be pushed forward. There are long time projects that need updating, and delivery options that we may want to consider, as an organization, to enhance or replace what we currently use. Frankly, I think I'm just crazy enough to take a number of these on and make them happen.
As a practitioner, I'm also a bit of a cynic (it comes with the territory of being a software tester). I know some of you are thinking... "OK, so what's in it for you?" That's a totally fair question. The fact is, I get opportunities to learn about software testing education in avenues I would not were I not part of this Board. I get the chance to help see grant opportunities develop for international testing conferences, and help see them get funded. I get a lot of satisfaction out of knowing that we as an organization are making a difference around the world, spreading a message of "sapient testing" that breaks free of old methods and default "factory paradigms" that, frankly, don't make sense in an ever adapting digital world.
Yes, I want to see those opportunities continue. I want to champion excellent software testing. I want to get involved with more initiatives that will help make software testing education more available, better performing, more engaging, and yes, dare I say it... FUN! There are many avenues where that could happen, but I like the mission and purpose of the Association for Software Testing, and everyone involved in it as members. I could approach these opportunities in a number of places, but I'd rather approach it here, with all of you.
Really, that's all I have to say. The final vote is yours. I have enjoyed very much these past two years working with you, and on your behalf. I'd like to ask you for two more years... membership willing :).
The Software Testing Club recently put out an eBook called "99 Things You Can Do to Become a Better Tester". Some of them are really general and vague. Some of them are remarkably specific.
My goal for the next few weeks is to take the "99 Things" book and see if I can put my own personal spin on each of them, and make a personal workshop out of each of the suggestions.
Suggestion #22: Take the Association for Software Testing "Black Box Software Testing" course(s) - Stephan Kämper
Standard Disclaimer time... I have very much a self serving interest to have people take the Black Box Software Testing (BBST) classes. For starters, I am (at the time of this writing) the Chair for the Education Special Interest Group with the Association for Software Testing. Long story short, I'm the Administrative head of this initiative. Would I love to have everyone who reads this become members of AST and pay to take the classes? Absolutely! Is that going to happen? Highly unlikely!
I really do think they are incredibly valuable, and I also think they are well worth the money charged for them. However, for some, money and time are genuine issues, and for many, they want to know exactly what they are getting involved in before they plunk down a chunk of change to take a class.
Having said all that, I'll also make something else clear… every concept, every lecture, every study note, and every exercise and reading that is part of the BBST series of classes can be accessed for free, on your own time, at your own pace, as much or as little as you want. If that sounds interesting, then please see the workshop details below:
I will make no bones about it. The BBST courses are tough. They ask a lot of participants. They cover a lot of ground in a short amount of time. Were I to make any one suggestion to anyone looking to participate in taking an actual BBST class as we offer it, I would likewise say "spend some time reviewing all of the material as the BBST site. Watch all of the lectures. Read all of the readings. Consider all of the projects and labs. Practice all of them." Why? Because you will understand the level of thinking and involvement that goes into the courses.
What will you not get with the BBST site? You do not get instructors who will coach and guide you. You will not get the quizzes or final exam questions to consider. Most important, you will not get a group of participants that you can interact with and share your experiences with, and receive feedback from. In truth, that is what you are paying for when you sign on to take a BBST course through AST (or through anyone else).
For those who just want to peruse the materials and see what this "context-driven testing" stuff is all about, and the idea of taking a formal class doesn't appeal to you, that's fine. Read through the materials and learn that way. If the idea of interaction and sharing is high on your priority list, then having read through these materials first will give you a huge boost when the time come to actually take the class. It's very likely that the individual experiences from each of the participants will add considerably to what you've learned, but having the baseline understanding first will, undoubtedly, make the experience easier to follow and meet in the time allotted for each class.
Bottom Line:
I think the BBST classes have great value, and I am happy to have been a participant and an Instructor for all of them, and look forward to doing so for a long time. Other instructors feel the same way, and we are here an ready to teach if you want to join us. Even if you don't want a live class, please take the time to check out the materials and read what has been compiled over the years.
If all you do is go through the materials on your own, and thoughtfully consider each of the lectures, lessons, labs, and readings, and take the time to work through each of the sections, I promise you will walk away with some great skills and a sense of better understanding where the context-driven approach of testing comes from. If you do choose to join us for the actual classes, then interactions with the other participants and their experiences (and yeah, a little boost from some live instructors) will help you learn a great deal more.
Today, SummerQAmp put out a press release talking about what they are doing for 2013, and the fact that they are working with a number of organizations to "pre-train" the interns that will be participating this year. For the full press release, take a look here:
"In addition, this year we are offering a more in depth online curriculum developed in collaboration with the Association for Software Testing, who is graciously providing the educational materials for students to sharpen their QA skills during the program..."
I want to say thank you to everyone that has taken the time and put forth the effort to help us develop materials and consider topics and provide details. A special thanks goes out to Smita Mishra, who single handedly (at least to date ;) ) took on the module about "What is the Software Development Process?"
Again, we are in the home stretch, but we are not out of the woods yet :). If you would like to help us get over this last hill and make our goal line on time (i.e. March 1, 2013) please head over to the EdSig Forum and weigh in with your ideas, on Bias, on Testing, on Context, on Software Development Process, or any other areas you think would be beneficial. Remember, our goal is "what did you wish you had known on your first day?" If we are not representing it, tell us, and tell us quickly :).
According to the Internet, and Mayan prophecy, December 21, 2012 is supposed to be the end of the world. I figure, if this proves to not be true, this will be something to allow me to celebrate a wonderful year of testing. If it does prove to be true, well, no one will be here to read this, so I suggest reading this quickly ;).
2012 was a pivotal year for me, in that I had a chance to do many things I'd never done, I had a chance to participate in a number of unique opportunities, and I made some decisions that have really made me question if it made sense to do things the same way I've done them for so long. Also, for those astute musical nerds out there, I'm referencing Talking Heads "Once in A Lifetime" once again with the title. It's proven to be quite a versatile song for these posts over the past few years.
When I wrote the first of these recaps in 2010, I was preparing to leave a job I had worked at for almost six years, and very much looking forward to a new adventure in a new capacity. In 2011, I shared many of the lessons I'd learned from making that step, and how being involved in the broader community had become very important to me. Thus I find it interesting that, here at the end of 2012, I am writing this message at yet another company, at the start of yet another "excellent adventure". "Same as it ever was?" seemed rather fitting, as this was not a year of business as usual. Not by a long shot!
2012 was a year of travel and outreach, and the opportunity to learn about and work with a number of interesting initiatives. I concluded my dive into Ruby and learning as much of the language as "Learn Ruby the Hard Way" would inspire me to do. This was a project started in 2011, and it ran for three months. I learned a lot along the way, and grew to appreciate many of the nuances of Ruby and how it works. My personal library of Ruby titles is huge now, which is a little ironic since, in my new role at Socialtext, I am looking at code that written mostly in... Perl :). Some might comment that I've wasted my time with all this Ruby focus, but I don't think so at all. What I've been able to do is approach a language at a deeper level than I ever have in the past, and do so with the eye of sharing my experience with others. That helped me internalize a lot more of it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not what I would consider a great programmer, nor even a moderately good one. Still, there's a level of appreciation and achievement I'm quite proud of, and I feel it will help me look at other languages and be a little less intimidated.
My friends Lynn McKee and Nancy Kelln invited me to participate in the POST 2012 workshop up in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, back in March. I was the facilitator for this event, and help the participants present their topics, discuss their ideas and critiques, and I also had a chance to present the idea of Weekend Testing as a service that any company could incorporate and associate with its test teams. An aded bonus, Lynn took me to Sunshine Village, one of the ski resorts in Banff National Park. Yep, I got to tick off a bucket list event... I snowboarded in Canada!
I had the pleasure of going to New Orleans to help plan out many of the events that would be part of the CAST conference for 2012, and visit some of the areas of the city (Bourbon Street, Royal Street, etc.) that I'd only heard stories about. It also gave me a chance to participate in the first Workshop day of STP-CON Spring 2012, likewise in New Orleans. I had the experience of being able to go and participate in and live blog five different workshops, and participate alongside many other intelligent and engaged testers.
I presented my first full paper and presentation at a conference this year. It was originally to be at PNSQC 2011, but a broken leg sidelined me and I was unable to present it. A friend who felt bad that I couldn't give my talk contacted Lee Copleland and suggested my talk would be a good fit for their conference. Lee read the paper and decided "yes, we'd like to see this presented" and offered me a spot on the program at STAR EAST 2012 in Orlando, Florida. I acepted and presented my talk. Additionally, I won Best Paper for "Delivering Quality, One Weekend at a Time". For the record, that was a seriously cool experience!
Weekend Testing in the Americas had a more regular schedule at one session per month. As we held our sessions throughout the year, we noticed an interesting pattern. There is a group of regular attendees that often participate. We have a number of brand new testers that come on and try it out a few times, then disappear. We have a number of one-offs, those who try it and never come back. Because of this, I determined it would be a good idea to get some additional brains into the mix to help develop sessions, content ideas, and other areas of focus. Albert Gareev has continued to be a great help to me in this regard, and we welcomed JeanAnn Harrison and Dan Gold into the mix of regularly contributing facilitators. Seriously, thank you to all of you, it made this year's sessions more enjoyable, and it gave me peace of mind to know that, if I couldn't be there for a session, that it would happen and all would be well. Additionally, I appreciate the influx of fresh ideas and different approaches.
Early in 2012, I had a chance to answer an article written about the SummerQAmp program, and what it hoped to accomplish. That proved to be a fateful message, in that I started a collaboration with the organizers of SummerQAmp and, along with members of the Association for Software Testing and other interested test professionals, we started writing what we hope will become a complete and practical introduction to the world of software testing. We delivered several modules and ran a beta test of the materials with a number of interns, and the response was "This is great! Can we have more of this?!" The answer, I hope, will be "Yes", and make no mistake, that will be a primary focus for me and for the AST EdSig in the new year. If you'd like to participate, please drop me a line!
I was invited to participate in Test Coach Camp, which happened the weekend prior to CAST 2012. This was an open-space conference event, where a number of testers participated and presented a variety of topics. I had the chance to present three different sessions (mentoring interns, teaching leadership skills, and a systematic deconstruction of Weekend Testing and the question "if we rebuilt it, what would you like to see us do?"). CAST 2012 also was the first chance to present the idea that has been my focus for much of the year, looking for that elusive balance between Test Driven Development, GUI Automation and Exploratory Testing. This topic showed up in a number of formats this year, and each time I approached it, I learned something new. First, it was a paper submission for PNSQC, then an emerging topics talk at CAST, then a full presentation at Agilistry Studios, and finally as a poster paper presentation that I gave (dozens of times) at PNSQC.
2012 saw me branch out and start contributing articles to a number of different outlets. Thanks to ST&QA, Testing Planet, Atlassian and Zephyr for allowing me the opportunity to write for a broader audience, and for their giving me a chance to open this blog up to more testers and people interested in my writing. This year I also set a record for traffic with a post that is now number 1 with a bullet on TESTHEAD. Which post? Learning to Tell Different Stories, where I compared the storytelling tradition in Japan to what us "westerners" are used to, and how the differences and nuances open us up to asking different questions once we see and understand that there are different ways of seing things beyond our own world view. I also enjoyed participating in ST&QA's "Ask the Tester", where I had the chance to answer a number of questions from the broader testing community. Also, I was a presenter in the Agile Transitions Online Conference for Software Test Professionals, where I presented my talk on "Being a Lone Tester on an Agile Team".
TWiST had another year of great conversations, great participation, and crossing the 100 episode mark (as of this week, we're up to episode #127). I always think of the old television maxim that, for a show to live on forever, it needs to pass 100 episodes to be eligible for life in syndication. I'm not sure if that's applicable for a podcast, but it's great to see that there is an appreciative audience, and that we can bring these discussions and ideas to you each week. I also enjoyed the various panels I participated in, and the shows I could contribute my ideas and thoughts to various discussions. Finally, I would be remiss were I not to say thank you to Justin Rohrman and Mark Tomlinson, who stepped in this year to help me edit episodes and do some of the "grunt work" that goes into getting these shows ready to be packaged and released. Seriously, your help is greatly appreciated!
During 2012, I continued my active involvement with the Miagi-do School of Software Testing, where Matt and Markus decided that I had earned the right to be advanced to a Black Belt Level Instructor. It's both gratifying and humbling to be associated with so many great testers, and while I now have the title of Instructor, sometimes I wonder who the real teacher is. I feel like I learn more from those I interact with than they likely learn from me.
As I have taken on the role as Chair of the Education Special Interest Group within the Association for Software Testing, I made the decision to step out of an active teaching role for the time being. While I will still be teaching some classes, I wanted to focus this year on giving others the opportunity to step up and learn how to lead the BBST classes and encourage those who haven't had the chance to assist and get a chance to teach as well. My goal for 2012 was to broaden our instructor pool, and that will continue to be a primary goal for 2013.
Hanging up my Lone Tester status was definitely not something I could have foreseen earlier this year, but looking at the interactions with others in so many other mediums, perhaps I should have seen it as inevitable. I decided that through all of the interactions I have had with my fellow testers, and with some feelings of frustration with my role as a lone tester, that I would put out some feelers and see if there were some test teams that would be interested in having a "Veteran of the Psychic Wars" join them. I have to admit I was surprised that so many responded, and so quickly. Thus, with the chance to "practice what I preach" regarding interaction, engagement and peer involvement, I made the decision to make the move from Sidereel, where I was a Lone Gun, to Socialtext, where I now work with a small but focused team of four testers... and by the way, we're looking for another tester to join us after the new year, so if you're interested (and local ;) ), let me know.
So many people have made this an amazing year for me, and to mention everyone by name will likely mean I'll leave someone out, so if I do, please don't feel slighted (and hey, if you do, email me and I'll put you in... blogs are cool like that :) ). Cheers and much appreciation to Aaron Scott, Albert Gareev, Anne-Marie Charrett, Becky Fiedler, Ben Simo, Benjamin Yaroch, Bill Baker, Catherine Karena, Cem Kaner, Dan Gold, Dee Ann Pizzica, Doug Hoffman, Elisabeth Hendrickson, Francis Adanza, James Bach, Janette Rovansek, JeanAnn Harrison, Jeff "Toxic" Burchell, Jon Bach, Justin Rohrman, Keith Klain, Ken Pier, Kevin Haggard, Lee Copeland, Lynn McKee, Mark Tomlinson, Markus Gaertner, Marlena Compton, Matt Barcomb, Matt Heusser, Mimi Mendenhall, Nancy Kelln, Patti Swift, Pete Walen, Peter "Pantera" Arzhintar, Rich Szeto, Rick Baucom, Scott Barber, Shampa Bannerjee, Thomas Ponnet, Timothy Coulter, and Zach Larson. Thank you for challenging me, for making me question my ideas, my motives, and my goals. Thank you for helping me make it possible to make changes, take burdens off of my shoulders and help me so that initiatives I started are being shepherded and able to keep going. Thank you for what has honestly been, at least as far as software testing is concerned, my greatest year (and remember, I said the same thing last year, and the year before that).
Oh, and should the world not end on December 21, 2012, then let me suggest that we follow the wise advice of Abraham Lincoln, who said:
It probably has not gone unnoticed that I am posting less frequently than usual. There's a few reasons for that, and one of them is that I am trying to get all of my ideas down for the education modules that we will be preparing for Summer QAmp. I had initially planned on writing everything out, and posting it, and then massaging it down to a useable format. The past several days have taught me that that is going to take a long time, and it will give a very limited amount of time for feedback and review from others.
Because of this, I've decided to take a different approach, and I hope that you all will join me. We are discussing the elements that we want to present in the education materials over on the Association for Software Testing's EdSIG forum. At the moment, you have to be a member of AST to post in the forums, but we may well change that for this initiative, so as to get as many of the interested contributors as possible to be able to post.
In the meantime, though, the forum is open for reading to anyone who wants to participate, and if you would like to have your ideas included, please reply and let me know your interest and areas you would like to contribute.
Additionally, if you would prefer to communicate with me via email, you are welcome to send a message to me directly at mkltesthead (at) gmail (dot) com.
AST's BBST Test Design class is now underway, with a slightly unexpected modification. When we ran the pilot curse, I assisted Cem in teaching it, which meant I had about one week's more involvement with the material than the participants did, and the old maxim "you can teach someone anything if you are two chapters ahead" certainly held, but it was also challenging to do it in that manner.
As we set up for the first run of the official class, and we accepted the participants, Cem made a suggestion to me. He said "Michael, how would you like to be a student this time around? You didn't get that opportunity for the Pilot, and if you are going to be leading these classes, it's important that you also see the course from the participants perspective". How could I argue with that :)?
So as of Sunday, I am now a participant in Test Design, and I get to be a student again. This is meshing pretty well overall. I did my Foundations class in early 2010, my Bug Advocacy class in early 2011, and now Test Design in early 2012. This will also give me a chance to see how well I understand the material I helped teach the first time around, and if this experience and a different perspective will help open up answers that I wasn't aware of before. In any event, this will be a cool experience, and I expect to learn a great deal from doing it.
It does, however, mean I will have to ask some indulgence from my Foundations class participants to give me a little bit more time to give them additional feedback. Much as I want to, I cannot stuff more than 24 hours into a day, and contrary to popular belief I really do need to sleep sometimes :).
Yesterday I posted an entry for the Association for Software Testing blog. It was also forwarded to the rest of the membership via their newsletter. In it, I made clear the fact that I will be taking over as the chair of the Education Special Interest Group (EdSIG) on March 31, 2012. But that wasn't all. I also stated that I had another "bold boast" up my sleeve, potentially my boldest boast yet.
I stated that, while I both admired the work and value of the content that is available through the Black Box Software Testing (BBST) courses, and I personally found them to be very valuable, there are many members of AST who will never take the classes. The reasons are varied but they often come down to one thing. BBST's three classes, as designed, is the equivalent of a university semester course on software testing. You get a lot of one on one time with instructors and assistants, we provide feedback and direct grading, we coach people directly. For those willing to commit to it, it is immensely beneficial, but there's no question about it, you are being asked to set aside a significant amount of time to do it.
For the people that will take the classes, there's little that needs to be done to convince them to do so. For those that will not take them, there's little that we can do to convince them to do so. With this in mind, I'd like to try something different.
I've seen these examples in things like NetTuts+ and Zed Shaw's and Rob Sobers' "Learn Ruby the Hard Way". These are specific, targeted, longer examples of learning, ways to get into the muck and do stuff, directly, with a dose of humor, and a lot of practical focus. There are many topics in testing that are just causally touched upon, because going into them in depth would be a huge undertaking. Describing context-driven testing principles alone has so many possible variations. Is it any wonder that we often reach for the overtired phrase "it depends"? It's 100% true, it's totally accurate, and most of the time, it's completely unhelpful. Wouldn't it be much more beneficial to gather a number of examples and actually show the differences? We often speak of polar opposites like a MMO video game and a pacemaker, and set these up as our examples of why context matters. I do not disagree, but specifically, what do they do that is different? What do they do that is similar? Why do they make the decisions they do? How can we encapsulate that in a meaningful way for testers to see, experience and consider?
It's with this that I want to look at the areas I'm already familiar with and expand the conversation to them. I'd like to see AST podcasts, screen-casts and video-casts taking on these areas. What's more, I'd like to see more voices included in the discussions. Cem has devoted literally thousands of hours over the years to recording the lectures he uses for BBST. It's been a monumental work on his part and I have no intention to redo or replace them. I also know that I personally don't have the time all on my own to do new video entirely. What I'd like to see is video conversations and examples explained by people in various industries. We hear all the time about the differences between finance, web, medical, government and academia, and many others. There are testers in all of those spheres. Who would you rather hear talk about their testing challenges and triumphs. Me? Or them? I'd much rather hear from them, from YOU, and I hope to find ways to include YOU in on the conversations and developments we make.
All this is my possibly over zealous and San Juan Hill charging way (or it might be a Little Big Horn charging way, time will tell) of saying "this dude is looking to make some new ways to look at testing education". I am not going to be able to do it alone. Are you willing to help me by lending your voice, your experience and your successes with me, so that we can help teach others and give US the tools to do more and be more? If so, Dudes and Dudettes, leave me a reply and lets get rockin'!!!
It seemed like such a little thing at the time :)!
Note, I'm not complaining, I'm happy to have the opportunities that come with being a passionate advocate, but sometimes I wonder when and how my reality got to be this packed so close together.
First, I'm very excited to be doing my first facilitation of a peer conference. My friends Lynn McKee and Nancy Kelln invited me to come up and act as facilitator for The Calgary Perspectives on Software Testing Workshop (POST). It's an annual peer workshop for software test practitioners, most attendees are from Canada, but some others are traveling from elsewhere. I'm excited to have been asked to participate, and I'm looking forward to being of service.
I'm home for just a couple of days, and then I fly out again to New Orleans for the Board Meeting for the Association for Software Testing, and while I'm there, I'm hoping to see if there's something I can do that Monday so that I can get to know some more people in the Software Test Professionals' Community attending STPCon (it's a tutorial day, and I'm not officially signed up for the conference, but I am hoping I'll be able to get involved some how for a little bit and get to meet and talk with people there.
I get a to week respite, and then it's of to Orlando, Florida for STAREast. I'm excited for this because of two reasons. First, I'm honored and privileged to have been chosen to present, but additionally, it's my second chance to present my talk on Weekend Testing that I couldn't present due to my broken leg last year (I had originally written it for the Pacific Northwest Software Quality Conference in 2011 in Portland, Oregon). Lee Copeland liked the content of the talk and asked if I'd be willing to present it at STAREast, to which I said yes, and thus, I'll be there to do so.
Truly, that's more traveling in a five week period than I have ever done before. It's been a challenge getting the rest of my life to align with these realities, but it's also a thrill that I have these opportunities in the first place. I've often joked that one could find opportunities in many places if they were willing to lift up the rocks and look for them. In many cases, when people know what you are up to and what you are willing to do and represent, they will also seek you out and give you the chance to make good on participating in those opportunities. I feel a bit overwhelmed at the immediate moment, but it's a good overwhelmed. It feels like I'm needed, and that people want to hear what I have to say and what I can contribute to the greater cause of testing. For that, I am both excited and grateful.
It's almost Saturday, and it's the end of week three of the current BBST Foundations class being offered by AST. Yeah, I know, I've done this lots of times, but this class is a bit different. First, I think this is the first time a class has run without any input from Cem Kaner, Becky Fiedler or Doug Hoffman, at least that I am aware of. Second, this is the first stint where I'll be taking the reins of the entire monster that is BBST via AST, and from March 31st, 2012, it'll be all mine. That though is both exhilarating, and at the same time, absolutely terrifying.
Let me back up a bit here. For those who are familiar, the Black Box Software Testing classes were a joint effort developed by Cem Kaner and James Bach. The material that is presented was initially written by them and compiled over several years. It's been well researched, field tested, and run regularly for the past several years, always under Cem's watchful eye. Cem recorded all of the videos for the course, a huge undertaking and tremendously time consuming. In short, BBST has been shepherded by Cem and Becky for years. Both Cem and Becky have solid academic credentials, doctorates in different disciplines, and lots of background in academic circles. Still, after so many years, they decided it was time for someone else to handle the AST commitment to the BBST courses. That's where I come in, a guy who took twenty years to cobble together a bachelors degree, who has no higher credentials beyond that, and who, frankly, is much more comfortable speaking "dude" than he ever will be discussing or interacting with academia. Yet AST seems to believe that I'm a good bet for running this initiative, so I'm giving it my all.
Before anyone considers throwing a pity party for me (and really, I ain't asking ;) ), I have to say I've had a great staff this time around. Adriano Comai, Mohamed Lahrech and Ray Oei have been my partners in crime for this go around, and they have done a fantastic job keeping on top of everything, and sometimes that includes telling me when I'm forgetting something. Yeah, I'm their Lead Instructor, but they hardly need me there, to be frank. The group of participants this time around has been great. Sometimes there are challenges and clashes of personality (testers being difficult and nit picky?! Perish the thought (LOL!) ). Seriously, it's been a great group, and they've really been great.
Tomorrow at midnight, our final exam will be posted, and then we'll see if I and my band of brothers have pulled this off. It's scary to know you are taking over something that has been run by a man that's considered a legend in the testing community. For those about to head into the final exam, I wish you good vibes and I look forward to seeing your answers and commenting on them. For everyone else considering if they want to take any of the BBST classes, I of course hope you will. While I can't promise to be your instructor (though there's about four times this year that will be a good bet ;) ), I believe the volunteers who teach these classes are great, and I think your being involved with them will make for a very worthwhile month of your time. We may not be perfect, but we give it our all, and I think you'll see that.
It's amazing to think that 2011 is almost over, and yes, while last year I lamented writing the obligatory "year that was" letters and somewhat lampooned them with my post last year titled "Well, How Did I Get Here?", that post resonated with many people. It is to date my most read and my most commented on article here on TESTHEAD, depending on which metrics you believe. Based on the response to that post, I decided this year to just let it be known, this is a recap of the World of TESTHEAD, and the world of "Michael Larsen, Tester" for the year of 2011. The title this year is indeed, again, in homage to the seminal 1980 Talking Heads classic "Once in a Lifetime".
2011 was a year of transition for me personally. I took many leaps of faith this year, and as the title says, I willingly jumped into new areas and new responsibilities. Early in the year, I ended my employment with Tracker Corp, bringing to an end six years of learning, camaraderie and a focus on the .NET world of software development and testing. In exchange, I came to Sidereel, and a world of learning, camaraderie and Rails software development. This is telling, because I'd never worked with Rails before, and my involvement with Ruby prior had been from recommendations from co-workers that it would be fun to learn. Well, now it was more than "fun to learn", it was an occupational hazard (and necessity :) ).
With that, I started mapping out and learning a new site, a new programming language, a new model, a new way of storing data, and very different approach to developing software. I was no longer just a tester, I was to integrate with a fully Agile development team and work with and alongside of them. Oh, and I traded in a daily diet of Windows and PC's for a daily diet of Mac OS X and Darwin UNIX all sleekly wrapped in a Macbook Pro. Oh UNIX, how I have missed you!!! There was just something comforting about leaving behind the world of MSI and EXE files and embracing tools such as ruby gems, homebrew and other options for installing software. Scriptable, customizable, and where Test Driven Development and Continuous Integration were not obscure buzzwords but actual practices that were, well, practiced! It's also been telling, humbling, and intriguing to learn about and use tools like Ruby, RSpec, Cucumber, Capybara, Selenium Web Driver and other areas of automating testing. I can safely say I have written more code this year than I have in the past 17 years prior!
2011 also saw the process of Weekend Testers Americas come into its own. What could have been a few experimental and jerky first few sessions got smoother, cleaner, and better understood, and we had some great successes during the year. While I'm not sure how much others have learned, I know that I learned a great deal from this process. What was great to see was that this initiative was embraced by people all over the world, and our participants reflected this fact, including testers who would come into our sessions at 12:30 AM (yes, after midnight) from India to participate. First off, that's dedication, and my hats off to everyone who did that, but more to the point, it spoke volumes about the service we were offering and the fact that people wanted to come in and participate, even at those insane hours. We had some help from some heavy hitters, too. Michael Bolton and James Bach both came in to guest host some of our sessions ("Domain Testing" and "Creating Testing Charters"), and Jonathan Bach helped me craft one of my breakaway favorite test ideas of this year, that of "Testing Vacations". In all, it was a banner year for Weekend Testing Americas, and I am so thankful for all of the participants that helped make it possible. I'm especially thankful for Albert Gareev, who in addition to being a regular participant, stepped up to become my partner in crime for this enterprise, and frequently helping me develop new ideas or take the process in different directions than I probably would have had I been left to my own devices.
2011 was a year of meeting and developing relationships with other testers. In January, I met Matt Heusser in person for the first time. As many of you know, one of my most involved and enduring professional relationships was with (and continues to be with) Matt. I produce the "This Week in Software Testing" podcast with him. I helped write a chapter for a book he was the principal editor for (more on that in a bit). I also was a sounding board for other ideas and offered several of my own in return. I had a chance to meet my fellow Weekend Testing Compatriots Marlena Compton, Markus Gaertner, and Ajay Balamurugadas in various places. Marlena and I had the pleasure of live blogging the entirety of the Selenium Conference from San Francisco, with our comments getting us branded as the "Table of Trouble" from the other participants. That was a fun memory, and it helped to set the stage for liveblogging other events throughout the year. Geting the chance to meet so many testers during this year in various capacities was a real highlight and much enjoyed aspect.
2011 also saw my commitment to being published. I made a decision that I wanted to write beyond the scope of TESTHEAD. As will probably come as no surprise, my first few articles were Weekend Testing based. However, I had the opportunity to venture into other topics as well, including two cover stories for ST& QA magazine; one being my article about "Being the Lone Tester" and another an excerpt of my chapter from "How to Reduce the Cost of Software Testing". Speaking of that, 2011 saw me and 20 other authors get our names in print and become book authors. It was a pleasure to have the chance to write a chapter for "how to Reduce the Cost of Software Testing". A later development, one in which I, literally, just got word about and accepted, was a potential new book that discusses "The Best Writing in Software Testing". I have agreed to be a junior editor for this project, and we are aiming for a 2012 release of this title. In addition, I also published articles with sites like Techwell, the Testing Planet and Tea Time With Testers. As of now, I have eleven articles that have been published external to TESTHEAD, and it is my hope that I'll be able to write more in the coming years.
2010 was a first in that I attended my first testing conference. I made the commitment then that 2011 would be the year I would present at a testing conference. I received my opportunity to do exactly that. My first ever conference presentation was just 20 minutes, and it was at CAST 2011. I presented in the "Emerging Topics" track and discussed Stages of Team Development lessons I had learned from Scouting, and how they could apply to Testers. All in all, it went well, and even today, I still hear from people who said they appreciated the topic and liked my presentation. In addition, I also gave another full track session at CAST called Weekend Testing 3-D, where not only did i discuss how to facilitate Weekend Testing style sessions, we actually held a live session with participants from all over the world, and processed it in real time (this was the earlier mentioned "Testing Vacations" session that Jonathan Bach helped me develop. In addition, I proposed a track talk and paper for the Pacific Northwest Software Quality Conference titled "Delivering Quality One Weekend at a Time: Lessons Learned in Weekend Testing" and after writing the paper and having it reviewed several times, received the nod to present it. However, fate struck, and I broke both bones in my lower leg (tibia and fibula), thus preventing me from delivering the talk (the organizers of PNSQC, however, still included my paper with the proceedings). Additionally, a friend who felt bad that I couldn't present at PNSQC forwarded my paper to Lee Copeland, the organizer of the STAR conferences. Lee liked the paper and asked if I'd be willing to present it at STAREast in April, 2012. I of course said YES! So I will get my chance to present this paper yet :)!
There is no question that I learned a great deal from the TWiST podcast, both as a producer and as an active listener, but 2011 will be even more memorable in that I graduated from editing the show and as an occasional guest to being one of a handful of rotating regular contributors on the mic. It's been interesting to have people email me and say "hey, I heard your interview last week, that was a great show and a great topic, thanks for your comments and explanations". I thought it was especially cool when I had someone say that they felt that I'd make a great game show host (LOL!).
2011 saw my continued focus on working with the Miagi-do School of Software Testing. At CAST 2011, a number of us Miagi-do Ka, including Markus Gaertner, Ajay Balamurugadas, and Elena Hauser worked along with Matt Heusser at the CAST testing challenge. During that competition, I had the chance to show Matt and the other testers there what I was able to do, and due to that experience, Ajay, Elena and I were awarded our Black Belts. While the experience itself was great, it also came with the expectation that I be willing to mentor and teach other testers, an opportunity that I have gladly taken on and look forward to doing more of in 2012.
One of my most active projects for the year of 2011 was helping to teach the Black Box Software Testing courses for the Association for Software Testing. I had the opportunity this year to instruct, as either an Assistant or as a Lead Instructor, all three courses offered in the BBST series (Foundation, Bug Advocacy and we just completed the pilot program for Test Design on December 10th). I was in this capacity that I was also nominated to run for the Board of Directors for the Association For Software Testing. I never envisioned myself being a Director of anything, much less an international software testing organization! Still, someone in the organization felt I deserved a shot, and nominated me. What's more, someone else seconded it. Even more amazingly, a lot of people (perhaps many of you readers) thought I'd be a good fit for the position as well, since I was indeed elected to serve on the board. My two year term began in October. While daunting, it is also exciting to think that I may actually help shape the future of this organization in the coming years, and to help represent my fellow testers. Believe me, it's not something I take lightly.
Quite possibly the biggest "Into the Blue Again" moment of the year, though, happened at our first AST board meeting in October. It was at that meeting that Cem Kaner and Becky Fiedler announced their desire to have someone take over as the Chairman of Education Special Interest Group. While a part of me felt I was wholly inadequate for the task, another part of me felt that this was something essential and that it needed someone to spearhead it so that the education opportunities within the organization could be championed and further developed, while allowing Cem and Becky the opportunity to do what they really wanted to do, which was develop more and better testing courses. With that, I offered to chair the Education Special Interest Group. I'm not sure what was more surprising, the fact that I offered, or that the rest of the board took me up on it! Two years ago, Cem Kaner was a man whose books I had read and whose presence loomed large as a "testing guru" on high. The thought I would ever meet him seemed remote. The thought I'd actually take over for him and spearhead an initiative he championed never even crossed my mind!!! Still, that's what has happened, and I guess 2012 and beyond will tell us what I actually did with it. I'm hoping, and working towards doing, all I can to prove worthy and up to the task.
2011 was, really, a year where I took leaps of faith, lots of them, and discovered that I could do even more than I ever imagined I could. I've shared may of those journeys in TESTHEAD posts, and I thank each and every one of you who are actively reading this blog for your help in motivating me to take these leaps of faith. It's been another banner year for me, both in learning and opportunities. Overall, the experiences of the past year have given me confirmation that, if I were to jump "Into the Bue Again", that it would be a great chance to learn and grow, regardless of whether or not the outcome were necessarily successful, lucrative or advantageous. Granted, most of them have been, and those that haven't been, well, I'd like to think I failed quickly and early enough to learn from those experiences and correct my trajectory. Time will tell if that's true, of course. As in all things, there were many people that helped make 2011 a banner year for me.
Thanking a bunch of people is always fraught with danger, because invariably someone gets left out, and there have been hundreds of people who have been instrumental in making this a banner year for me. Still, there are many that stand out, so to that, my heartfelt thanks to Adam Yuret, Ajay Balamurugadas, Albert Gareev, Alex Forbes, Anne-Marie Charrett, Ashley Wilson, Becky Fiedler, Benjamin Yaroch, Bill Gilmore, Cem Kaner, James Bach, Janette Rovansek, Jason Huggins, Jon Bach, Lalitkumar Bhamare, Lee Copeland, Lynn McKee, Markus Gaertner, Marlena Compton, Matt Heusser, Orian Auld, Rick Baucom, Selena Delesie, Shmuel Gershon, Terri Moore, Thomas Ponnet, Timothy Coulter, Will Usher and Zach Larson. Thank you all for helping me make those leaps of faith. More to the point, thank you for having the faith in me that I'd be able to actually do what you believed I could do! Thank you for what has honestly been, at least as far as software testing is concerned, my greatest year (and remember, last year was pretty awesome, too. I didn't think I'd be able to top that!).
Here's to an every bit as exciting and fun-filled 2012. I'm looking forward to seeing where I might leap next :).
It's been an adventurous six weeks, to say the least.
While Saturday marked the official end of AST's latest Black Box Software Testing class, Test Design, I've been frantically reading, comparing, rereading, and grading exams. As the class has now wound down, and the last details related to announcing completion of the course to the participants, it's time to reflect on what I've been through for the past six weeks (that includes setting up the Moodle environment, populating the quizzes, the forums, and a lot of administrivia type stuff that I have dealt with here and there, but never quite to this scale. It was indeed enlightening.
So what is Test Design? Well, it's the third and final of the original sequence of classes that makes up the core Black Box Software Testing curriculum. If you were to combine all three courses together (Foundations, Bug Advocacy and Test Design) you would have a full university semester course worth of material on Software Testing. That was the point from the outset, and now it's all here, under one roof, and able to be taken by those who sign up and commit to participate. Of course, you can always watch the materials and do the coursework on your own time for free, but some amazing interactions happen within the structured, facilitated course. For that reason alone, I'd suggest coming in and participating.
Test Design is a massive survey course. It deals with a tremendous amount of information at a breakneck speed. "Drinking from a firehouse" is a quaint figurative turn of a phrase, but in this case, I believe it is 100% appropriate. There is just so much information and not a lot of time to digest it all. As Cem states in the lectures in the first couple of minutes, you're not expected to absorb it all, nor are you expected to absorb it all on multiple viewings. Over time, as you practice and consider the techniques, and apply them, you will get better and understand which ones work best where.
If there's one specific gem above any others I would suggest as a reason to get familiar with this material, it would be the Heuristic Testing Strategy Model (HTSM). This is an excellent framework in which to hang testing of any software component, ranging from a single function to an entire system. It's huge, and there's a lot of questions that you can ask of a product, and each question can help guide to to more questions and more exploration. It's not a true "map" to testing, but it's a nice encapsulation of a bunch of different techniques, domains and areas where testing can be applied. Not all pieces will be relevant all the time, but it's amazing how much this one item of the course adds to an overall testing strategy.
The labs for this class range from very basic to significant involvement. Unlike in previous courses, group work is not as emphasized, though the option to pair on most assignments is there. The Exam Cram forum, from which the final exam is drawn, is double the length of Foundations and Bug Advocacy. This means a lot of questions to answer, but also a lot of different parameters to consider, with a lot of tips and techniques to apply immediately to your workplace environments.
Are those dreaded quizzes still there? Well, yes, although interestingly, I think that the quizzes this time, while structured in the longer, less prone to guessing right answers format, I felt the quizzes were more straightforward than in the previous two classes. I think that may be because this was the class I came in with the least preconceived notions of what the answers should be; I hit a lot of "first time material" in this course, at least first time for me, and interestingly, I think that was a help. I didn't have what I felt were "gut answers" that felt right, but were wrong on further reflection. I actually scored beter on these quizzes than I did on Foundations and Bug Advocacy. Your mileage, of course, may vary.
I say a lot of this with a tremendously heavy amount of bias; I help teach these classes of course. Were you to take my recommendations with a hefty grain of salt, I'd totally understand. Having said that, though, I absolutely feel this is a worthwhile class. It's challenging, it will be hard to manage, it will overwhelm you, and I think you'll be really happy that you went through it regardless of all that :). The Pilot is over, but there's still time to get in on the next class. It will be offered again in March, 2012, and Cem and I will be the instructors again (plus others, I'm sure :) ). If you've completed both Foundations and Bug Advocacy, and want to take it to the next level, here's a golden opportunity to participate in a challenge that will make you stretch and grow... in good ways, I promise!
Well, now that it's been announced to the students in the current AST Instructor's Course, I guess their's no reason to not mention it here. While I was in Madison a couple of weeks ago for the AST Board Meeting, one of the orders of business was the need for someone to take over as the Chair of the Education Special Interest Group (EdSIG) within AST. I'd heard of this need for quite some time, but I kept my mouth shut, because, really, what do I now about Education? I'm not a teacher (well, not really), I certainly don't have any academic credentials, or any fancy title to go with my name. I certainly don't have much in the way of academiese in my vocabulary; I'm much more comfortable speaking "dude".
Yes as I kept think about the situation and the needs, I realized that I may actually have more of an understanding of these things than I gave my credit for. I finished my Bachelors degree, my last two years, entirely online via distance learning courses. I went through 22 online courses of varying quality levels and went through a total immersion process to get the most out of them. Were they exactly like university classes held on campus? Nope, but they had their own interesting challenges, and I'll dare say I learned quite a bit from all of them. I realized that this experience dovetailed well into the way that AST delivers the BBST Classes through online facilitation.
What's more, I was one of the few people who has taught Foundations and Bug Advocacy, and was participating in the pilot program of the Test Design class (which starts next week, btw, and yes, I'm excited to be participating in it :) ), plus I'm scheduled to help teach the March session of the Test Design class. Who else could say they've been teaching all three of the classes (well, OK there's a couple others, but I was one of them)?
As I mulled these over in my head, I decided to do something brave or crazy... time will tell on that one :). By the time we reached the end of the discussion, I decided that there needed to be a Chair for the EdSIG... and if no one was going to step up to the plate, well why shouldn't I throw my hat in the ring? So that's exactly what I did, an for better or worse, the board accepted my offer :).
So over the next few months, I will be learning the ropes of what the EdSIG entails, but most specifically how to administer and run the BBST course series for AST's members and participants. That's a big chunk of where my involvement will be, and due to that, it means my direct involvement as a regular instructor will likely diminish (though I'll still be involved with all of the classes). What this does mean is that there will be a need for more instructors to help teach. We have a fresh cadre of newly minted Certified Instructors for courses, and it's my hope that they will step into the role of helping teach the upcoming classes in 2012. It's also my hope that many of you out there will consider taking the classes if you haven't already, and help me to deliver the best software testing training to be found anywhere on the planet (that's a bold boast, I know, but I happen to believe it :) ).
So by Midnight Pacific time tonight, the last official actions of the Association for Software Testing's Black Box Software Testing Foundations class (well, this one in any event) will conclude, and with it, my second voyage as a lead instructor.
In some ways, this was a more challenging class than the last time I was in this position, not the least of which was the fact that I watched and worked with this class from the confines of my bed for the first three weeks. Only this past week have I been up and about enough to be more active and involved. Thus, I have to say up front to my participants, if I was not as involved as you would have liked or expected, I do apologize.
This is now the sixth time I've worked with the Foundations class. Once as a regular participant, three times as an assistant instructor, and two times now as lead instructor. Every class is different, and every class has different challenges and different surprises. The fun part is to see which participants just go along with the class and the flow, and which ones really get involved and just tear it up. The other interesting aspect is that, as I've participated in the courses over time, and in the broader testing community, I am having more participants come in that I have either a correspondent relationship through sites like Twitter or Facebook, or those that actually work with me on endeavors like Weekend Testing. Usually it goes the other way around, where participants come and take part in Weekend Testing. This time the tables were turned, and I got to have my cohort and fellow WTA facilitator Albert Gareev in my class. I think this is the closest I've yet come to someone I regularly interact with on a peer level actually being a "student" of mine, and in a way... it's odd (LOL!). I've been told by other instructors that as times goes, this actually becomes more and more common, so I guess I better get used to it :).
This was a lively group, and there have been some great participants. I've learned a lot from them and their enthusiasm and energy, as well as their areas and places where they struggled or had questions. I know, I say the same thing at the end of every class, so I know I run the risk of sounding trite, but really, each class gives me a new lens to view the course material. I come out with another insight on subjects that some might consider to be "rote". At least for me, it doesn't become rote because I get different perspectives and different impassioned comments from participants, and that helps to keep it all fresh.
I've been taking notes, and I see a number of people in the course that I think might well be good instructors later (I'll not name names, but it's no secret that we often find instructors from the ranks of the participants... heck, that's how I got involved :) ).
So what's next for me? Well, the Instructor's Course is next...wait, what?! Yep, it's true. Because of varying factors, each time the Instructor's Course has been offered, I've either been unavailable or it had to be canceled. Normally, to be a Lead Instructor, you have to have gone through the class, so I'm an outlier, but I committed to get that resolved as soon as possible. For others who are interested, there may well still be room, so if you want to join me in the class, head over the the main site and sign up :). This will also be the last Foundations class for this calendar year. The next one will be held in February of 2012, and as of right now, I'm scheduled to teach it!
I've had a great time being the Lead Instructor for this Foundations class, even with my challenges this time around, and I'm hoping my participants have likewise enjoyed the experience. Thanks for teaching me a lot more than I probably taught you :). Also, my thanks to my co-instructors Selena Delesie and Brian Osman, and as always, much thanks to Cem Kaner and Becky Fiedler for their support, encouragement and guidance when I needed it. It's been a fun ride!
This was the topic of my Emerging Topics talk that I gave at the Conference for the Association for Software Testing (CAST) up at the Lynwood Convention Center in Lynwood, WA.
What was great about this was the fact that this talk and many others were streamed to other AST members and, well, anyone interested, all over the world. Claire Moss, a tester and active blogger (@aclairefication on Twitter), did a terrific write-up of the whole talk and the flow of the talk. So terrific, I don't think I could do it much better justice by recapping it here, but to say "go see Claire's blog and read her summary".
Also, to her comments about the Girl Scouts Oath and Law, it's very similar to the Boy Scout Oath and Law in purpose and intent, and it all comes back to what I've said many times... if we all would agree to live by and conduct ourselves based on the Boy Scout (and Girl Scout) Oath and Law, then we would not need to have such a large number of "ethics"discussions and standards. We'd already be doing all that!
There are a couple of comments I wanted to add about the experience itself, so that's more of what this represents. First, the model of team development that I referred to has an official name. I've just referred to it as the "Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing" model or the "four stages of team development" model for so long I always assumed everyone knew hat I was talking about. Time to give due credit. This model was developed by Bruce Tuckman in 1965 and a pretty good run down of the model can be seen here. There is an additional step that was added later on in the 1970s, and that is "Adjourning" since for many, the team responsibilities do not go on indefinitely. In this same page, the ideas of what the leader does and how they pivot is described as the Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership model. The terms they use are "Telling-Selling-Participating-Delegating", which are in many ways just bigger words than those used by the Boy Scouts in their EDGE(TM) acronym (Explain-Demonstrate-Guide-Enable).
All in all, I had a great time delivering this talk, and making something that I use in the Scouting movement relevant to testers. I really appreciated the fact that it was a topic that hit home with many testers, and that there were those out there who took the time to tweet about their enjoyment of the talk and to even do a full write-up. If there are others out there who have blogged about it or referenced the talk, I'd like to know so I can thank them directly. Also, while the talk was streamed, I'm hoping it was also recorded, and if so, I'm hoping to be able to post a video of the talk when/if it is posted.
Day 2 started out with an interesting TWiST... yes, that's a pun, and yes that's on purpose. Matt Heusser, Markus Gaertner, Ajay Balamurugadas and I (with Adam Yuret joining us later) did a Live podcast where we discussed the CAST testing challenge and our approach to how we went about doing it. It was a lot of fun, and I'm hoping that we'll get a good podcast out of it (first time recording live with the Snowball in Omni mode).
Jon Bach started the day with a recap of some of the issues that we had yesterday and the solutions made today to resolve most of them. How cool is it to have a bunch of testers looking at issues... and actually having the power to do something about it? As a side detail, it was fun to see the ten comments taken "out of context" during the testing competition, and I had to laugh when my comment of "you have to be nice to a parrot, or parrots will kick your ass!" making it on the board (LOL!). I'll explain later what that means, but hey, consider it a teaser for now.
James Bach keynote is covering the "Cool New Things" in the software testing world, and it's been interesting to see the ideas he's discussed, such as the collapse of the Software Testing Factory, the "Death of Quality", the Politics that have led us to where we are today, and some of the reality that Agile is bringing to the practice of software testing. James make the comment that "Agile seems to be about index cards moving along a wall" meaning that people are focusing on the technique, rather than the skill that the approach instills, which is disciplined craftsmanship and focus on development. Which brings us to what James thinks is the "next cool thing" and to him, it's "Intersubjectivity Revolution", where more of us are stepping away from making up nonsense metrics, and instead giving true qualitative assessments. James also gave a shout to the new movements taking place in the testing world, and it felt really awesome to see him mention Weekend Testing and showing such praise for it as a truly organic movement and one that goes so totally against the grain of the way things are right now (especially in India, where it started, which James mentioned he thought was absolutely amazing considering India's history and culture related to testing in general. It's the rebels that formed Weekend Testing :) ). James also focused on test coaching and teaching test coaching, so that those of us who teach testers can get better at teaching testing. James closed his talk with some cool tools and some cool books, including Wittgenstein and the idea that things like tacit and explicit knowledge are important to understand, and the idea that we need to put people into uncomfortable situations for them to really learn. It also could lead to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, but hey, small price to pay for knowledge, right :)? During the Q&A, James talked about the testing play book, which is a listing and details that are pertinant to structuring their threads.
Day 2 is a little interesting for me, in that I'm in less of a "attendee mode" today and more of a "presenter mode". Following James Keynote, I set up and ran WTA3D, which meant that the attendees online participated along with people at the conference. This was be a blending of two models, the Weekend Testing online model and a class about facilitation of Weekend Testing charters and missions for those in attendance. Thus, I was on for a few hours and my blog output was definitely diminished. Also, I want to give a shout out to the panel discussion that I will not be able to attend (can't be in two places at one) having to do with the "How to Reduce the Cose of Software Testing" book. As a contributing author, I have to say that missing this is killing me, but WTA3D is what paid my way to the conference, so I'll be dancing with the one that brung me :).
The session today for WTA3D was very fun and had a great energy both from the attendees online and the attendees in the room with me presenting. We decided to change things up and let the participants see behind the curtain as to how Weekend Testing sessions worked, and the things that we actively do when we are setting up the sessions, designing the mission and charters and actively leading an facilitating the sessions. For our actual testing session, we focused on eBay and performing what are called Testing Vacations (I think Elizabeth Hendrickson gets credit for that phrase). The idea is that we had several small objectives (actually, ten of them) and we decided to have groups take on certain challenges and report on how they achieved them, and to encourage others to comment on their testing approach and method. The session went for three hours and fifteen minutes (longer by 50% than a typical Weekend Testing session) but the participants seemed to enjoy the session. Plus, we expected people would come and go and thus structured it that way.
During lunch, we received the results on the testing challenge, and I'm happy to say that, even though the Miagi-do team wasn't eligible to win a prize, we scored very high on all categories... except one. We took the risk of issuing what's referred to in the racing world as a "Black Flag", and said that we felt the application was not fit for testing, and spelled out the reasons. Apparently, we "ticked off the developer" and that put us out of contention, but it was also interesting to hear the organizers of the competition say "If Miagi-do was an eligible team, the choice for first place would have been really difficult." Frankly, I can't ask for a better outcome (well, OK, it would have been nice to win outright :) ), but I'm happy about how that all went down, and how great it was to work with such a great group of testers, literally spanning the globe... and I'll stand by our team issuing the Black Flag, I think it was the right thing to do :).
Lunchtime also announced the members who were elected to the Board of Directors. I can report now that the new board members are Matthew Heusser, Cem Kaner... and Michael Larsen :). Yep, I got elected to the Board of Directors, which is both thrilling and dreadfully sobering at the same time. I'm excited to see what the coming years has in store, and I'm excited to take on this challenge. after the elections, I discussed with the board that I would be willing to take on the role as Treasurer for the organization. I still have to be officially voted in, but it looks as though that's the direction this is heading :).
After lunch, I participated in a forum discussion about the Black Box Software Testing classes. I have to say, this is an area that is near and dear to my heart, since the whole point of my blog is backing away from mis-education and making an effort towards re-education (n the good way, not the internment camp way ;) ).We had a vigorous discussion with Selena Delesie, Doug Hoffman, Mimi Mendenhall, and myself talking about the future of the classes, setting expectations, and geting through the dreaded first quiz. It also made me smile to realize that so many people had that same experience, yet had overwhelmingly positive things to say about the course as a whole. That makes me feel confident that there's a great opportunity in these classes and I'm hoping to see them grow and expand.
I was able to be an attendee again for the final track session, and I chose to attend Sajjadul Hakim's "Understanding the Gut Feelings in Testing". I enjoyed hearing Sajjadul discuss the ways that both the conscious and unconscious mind work together. In reality, we all work on gut feelings, but the expert tester has more than gut feeling to work with. We have heuristics, we have ways of analyzing what we see, but often, we stil have that unmistakable "feeling" that makes itself known when they test. the best way to describe this is that they have already conditioned themselves to these ideas, and because they have conditioned themselves, they have a deep reserve of knowledge and experience to draw from. I find myself struggling with this myself, in that I have lots of intuition, but I don't really trust it much of the time. Many times, that intuition does prove to be true, but it's fallible enough to make us doubt our intuition. But if we continue testing and seeing these things happen over and over again, then we get to trust that intuition more and more.
At the end of the day, Matt and Markus gathered Ajay, Elena and me together and anounced that, based on our performance in the CAST testing challenge, all three of us deserved to receive our black belts in the Miagi-do school of software testing. For the record, I respect both Matt and Markus a lot, and while I get the idea that the belt system in Miagi-do is a little corny and helps us not take ourselves to seriously, it does mean I had the chance to work with testers I admire and respect, and after several hours of intense focus, having them say "yeah, Michael, you get this, you are genuinely and solidly competent as a tester" really means a lot to me. For those curious as to how long it took me to update my blog with the new designation, the official answer is "two minutes"; enough time to whip open my laptop and get to the page to edit :).
Peter Walen and I were able to facilitate the Education Sig meeting and we had a good group come and join us. We discussed some cool ideas that we'd like to see the Education SIG take on, as well as opportunities for the SIGs to get involved in conferences or other events directly and make time so that we can complete initiatives that have been in limbo for some time. Also, we got word that the script and the syllabus for the Test Design class for BBST is finished and that we wil be looking at the class being available some time in late September or early October. Again, I'm excited to see it, and I'm looking forward to being a participant in it.
Tomorrow it will be the 1/2 and full day tutorials. By their nature, I'm guessing the twet stream will be a lot smaller, as most of the people at the conference will have left. I'm for sure attending Anne Marie Charret's tutorial on "Managing Testing Careers". We'll see what else tomorrow brings, but one things for sure, the adventure ends tomorrow at 5:00 PM and then it's time to get back to Sea-Tac and get on a plane to come back home.
