NATIONAL ENGINEERING COLLEGE, K.R.

NAGAR, KOVILPATTI – 628 503

(An Autonomous Institution, Affiliated to Anna University – Chennai)
DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING
Theory Course Plan - Odd Semester - 2020-21

Course Code and Title : 15CS25E & SOFTWARE TESTING TECHNIQUES

(Q.Pattern : B – 2 marks & 16 marks)
Programme : B.E. CSE
Semester : VII
Course Instructor : Mr.A.Shenbagharaman, AP/CSE
Course Coordinator : Mr.A.Shenbagharaman, AP/CSE

Course Outcomes (COs):

CO Statements
Relate
Upon the completion of the CO Related Threshol Targe
COs d
course the students will be able Level PO d t
PSO
to
Analyze the behavior of testing PO1,PO2, PSO1 80
CO1 techniques to examine the origins K4 PO4
of defects in software. (K4)
Design suitable test cases for the K3 PO1,PO2, PSO1 75
CO2
given scenario. (K3) PO3, PO5 60% of
Analyze and apply suitable K4 PO1,PO2 PSO1 class 75
CO3 testing strategies for software average
testing. (K4)
Identify the suitable test plan K2 PO1,PO2, PSO1 80
CO4 components for finding the bugs PO4
in the software. (K2)
Appreciate the test automation K2 PO1,PO2, PSO1 80
CO5 concepts and tools. (K2) PO3, PO5

Mapping of Course Outcome (CO) with Programme Outcome (PO) and Programme
Specific Objectives (PSO):
PO PSO
COs
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2
CO1 3 3 2 2
CO2 3 3 3 3 2
CO3 3 3 2
CO4 3 2 3 2
CO5 3 3 2 3 2
Note : Correlation 3 – Strong 2 – Medium 1 – Weak 0- No

Course Content Delivery Method:

No. of
Level of Hours to
Course Content Cos Content Delivery
Content be
Handled
UNIT I INTRODUCTION

Testing as an Engineering Activity 1.Own voice video 2

– Testing as a Process Lectures
Overview of the Testing Maturity (Prerecorded / Live 2
Model– TMM levels
 No. of
Level of Hours to
Course Content Cos Content Delivery
Content be
Handled
Basic Definitions –Software recording) 2
Testing Principles 2. Discussion Forum
Tester’s Role in a Software / Whatsapp for 2
Development Organization interactions & doubt
Origins of Defects – Cost of clarifications in 1
Defects.
google meet
Defect Classes – Defect
1
Repository and Test Design. CO1 K4
UNITII TEST CASE DESIGN
Test Case Design Strategies 2
1.Own voice video
Black Box Approach to Test Case Lectures
Design: Random Testing- (Prerecorded / Live 2
Equivalence Class Partitioning recording)
Boundary Value Analysis – 2.Discussion 2
Cause-and-Effect Graphing Forum / Whatsapp
White Box Approach to Test CO2 K3 for interactions & 2
Design: Test Adequacy Criteria doubt clarifications
Coverage and Control Flow in google meet.
1
Graphs
Covering Code Logic – Role of
1
Paths.
UNITIII LEVELS OF TESTING
Need for Levels of Testing – Unit
1
Test: Planning –Designing 1. Lecture
Test Harness – Running and interspersed with
Recording results – Integration discussions
2. Brain Storming 1
test: Test strategies for procedure
and Functions 3. Discussion Forum
Designing Integration Tests – / Whatsapp for
Integration Test Planning - CO3 K4 interactions/doubt
clarifications in 1
System Testing: Functional
Testing– Performance Testing google meet.
Stress Testing – Configuration
Testing- Security Testing - 1
Recovery Testing
Regression Testing-Alpha, Beta
1
and Acceptance Testing.
UNITIV TEST MANAGEMENT
Test Planning – Test Plan 2
Components
Test Plan Attachments 1.Lecture
interspersed with 2
Locating Test Items – Test CO4 K2 discussions 2
Management – Test Process- 2.Discussion
Forum / Whatsapp 1
Reporting Test Results – Role of
for interactions/
Critical Groups and Policy doubt clarifications
Development in google meet.
Test Specialist: Introduction– 1
Skills Needed
Building a Testing Group 2

UNITV TEST AUTOMATION

Software Test Automation: Skills 1.Lecture 2
– Scope interspersed with
Design and Architecture CO5 K2
discussions 2
2.Demonstration
Requirements for a Test Tool – 3. Discussion Forum 2
 No. of
Level of Hours to
Course Content Cos Content Delivery
Content be
Handled
Challenges in Automation
Test Metrics and Measurements 2
Project, Progress and Productivity / Whatsapp for
interactions/doubt 2
Metrics
TOTAL HOURS clarifications in
45

TEXT BOOKS
1. Ilene Burnstein, “Practical Software Testing: A Process-Oriented Approach”, Springer
International Edition, 2003.
2. Srinivasan Desikan, Gopalaswamy Ramesh, “Software Testing – Principles and
Practices”, 1st Edition, Pearson education, 2006.

ONLINE COURSE MATERIALS:

1. https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/getStarted/problems/
2. http://www.softwaretestingclass.com/software-testing-tools-list/
3. http://www.softwaretestinghelp.com/performance-testing-tools-load-testing-tools/
4. http://learndatamodeling.com/blog/software-testing-tools-list/
5. http://www.testingtools.com/test-automation

REFERENCES
1. Ron Patton, “Software Testing”, 2ndEdition, Sams Publishing, Pearson Education,
2007.
2. Renu Rajani, Pradeep Oak, “Software Testing – Effective Methods, Tools and
Techniques”, Tata McGraw Hill, 2004.
3. M.G.Limaye, “Software Testing: Principles, Techniques and Tools”, 1st Edition, Tata
McGraw-Hill, 2009.
4. Aditya P. Mathur, “Foundations of Software Testing – Fundamental algorithms and
Techniques”, Dorling Kindersley (India) Private Limited, Pearson Education, 2008.

Video lectures

Unit-1

S.NO TOPIC LINK

1 Testing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kHKtkGQbSVzBvCxHpSFnXfLE_Qe2r9WQ/view?
an usp=sharing
introduct
ion
2 Basic https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fEv5ut-eSbYrWu_3v237SIKpqtxV9Op-/view?
terminol usp=sharing
ogies
3 Process https://drive.google.com/file/d/129Eqk8iVrZznAlOYtsrcp2XDzEmLr-ZU/view?
usp=sharing
4 TMM https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YU13vmgZyeQ8gdETC7-KvBoHz8EO_Yht/view?
levels usp=sharing
5 Testing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NOcouZ_WXDeeWdel9wpC9EwcSYi1lcCH/view?
Principle usp=sharing
s
6 Tester https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Dk_T9MksdHMGFZDxrBQtngBcyotquMep/view?
role and usp=sharing
origin of
defects
7 Defect https://drive.google.com/file/d/16YKOMGqTtYoCSu2fhU-LfuabFSaL-YcA/view?
 classes usp=sharing
and
defect
repositor
y
8 Coin https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WRxwOtCrKU0LNdor_PNbDGkH8KoP_0sc/view?
problem usp=sharing

Unit-2

S.NO TOPIC LINK

1 Testing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LphmMu07Tm49735z-wozFZQ_9jHusn2I/view?
Design usp=sharing
strategie
s
2 Black https://drive.google.com/file/d/1X6FOe7uf_ejdfG-8uEWzhnxjN7_18XQU/view?
box usp=sharing
testing
3 White https://drive.google.com/file/d/1C_MgERYSYep7IwMd5uWQmctt1hFCfZmj/view?
box usp=sharing
testing
4 Bounda https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JQGGoG-xcr4P7oAHifqhqfTvkN_ISenn/view?
ry value usp=sharing
analysis
5 Cause https://drive.google.com/file/d/1W_lhYNK78o9qVoKaTVEDB6RZ8CJe8q9H/view?
and usp=sharing
effect
graph
6 Equival https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DrAUme8ZZ3v_oRmkonaLB3LQs5LQrIxk/view?
ence usp=sharing
class
partition
ing
7 Test https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RTSusnUKX5zue08jna-KMN51D2Pm0oSv/view?
adequac usp=sharing
y
criteria
8 Coverag https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VhaWKfTbRjNOcqQZbeuO0MEM1fA77eHh/view?
e usp=sharing
control
flow
graphs
& paths

Assessment Procedure:

Assessment Tools
Other Assessment Tools
IAT Cognitive Domain
Tool Affective Domain Tool Course Weightage
(Weightage – 0.6) (Multiple Choice (Viva Interim of CO for
CO Internal
Question /Seminar/Presentation/… Survey
/Assignment / …) (CIS) mark
Tutorial/…..)
(Weightage – 0.15) (Weightage – 0.15) (Weightage – 0.1)
CO1 IAT 1 CIS 1 20
Multiple Choice Viva
CO2 IAT 1 Question CIS 2 20
CO3 IAT 1 & IAT 2 Test case Design Video Presentation CIS 3 20
 Assignment
CO4 IAT 2 CIS 4 20
Controlled test Think Pair Share
CO5 IAT 2 CIS 5 20

Rubrics for Evaluation of Affective domain Tools: Viva

Performance
5 point 4 point 3 point 2 point 1 point
Indicators
Content Shows a full Shows a Shows a Shows a Does not
understandi Very good good average seem to
ng of the understandin understandin understandin understand
topic. g of the g of parts of g of parts of the topic
topic. the topic. the topic. very well.
Communicati Speaks Speaks Speaks Speaks Often
on clearly and clearly and clearly and clearly and mumbles or
distinctly all distinctly all distinctly distinctly cannot be
the time the time, but most ( 94- most ( 40- understood
mispronounc 85%) of the 50%) of the OR
es one word. time. time. mispronounc
Mispronounc Mispronounc es more than
es no more es no more one word.
than one than one
word. word.

Rubrics for Evaluation of Affective domain Tools: Presentation

Performance
5 point 4 point 3 point 2 point 1 point
Indicators
Preparedness Student is Student The student The student Student
completely seems pretty is somewhat is somewhat does not
prepared prepared but prepared, prepared, seem at all
and has might have but it is clear but it is clear prepared
obviously needed a that that to present.
rehearsed. couple more rehearsal rehearsal
rehearsals. was lacking. was totally
lacking.
Comprehension Student is Student is Student is Student is Student is
able to able to able to able to unable to
accurately accurately accurately answer very accurately
answer answer most answer a few answer
almost all questions few questions questions
questions posed by questions posed by posed by
posed by classmates posed by classmates classmate
classmates about the classmates about the s about
about the topic. about the topic. the topic.
topic. topic.
Evaluates Peers Fills out peer Fills out Fills out Fills out Fills out
evaluation almost all of most of the some of the most of
completely the peer peer peer the peer
and always evaluation evaluation evaluation evaluation
gives scores and always and always and always but scoring
based on the gives scores gives scores gives scores appears to
presentation. based on the based on based on be biased.
presentation. the the
presentation presentation
. .
Rubrics for Evaluation of Affective domain Tools: Think Pair Share

On Task Students were on task the Students were on task Students were partly
whole time. most of the time. on task

Volume Students used six-inch Students were a little Students were very
voices. too loud. loud and distracted
others.
Attention Students listened to Students listened to Students partly
everything each other said each other most of the listened to each other
time
Participation Both students shared Only one student Students didn't talk
answers shared answers about their answers.

Notes Letter Analysis Form is filled Letter Analysis Form is Letter Analysis Form is
out with as much relevent filed out but some filled out with almost
information as possible information is not no information that is
relevent to the letter. relevent to the letter.

Rubrics for Assignment

Level of Content (7-10) Content (6-5)Content level (<5)Very meagre
should match with relevant with the content
the marks assigned marks assigned for
for the question the question
Submission time 5(in exact time) 4(within two days) <=3(within end of the
week)
Semantics 5(Exact content ) 4(Appropriate <4(Some relevant
content) content)

Course Interim Surveys Rubrics (For all Units) All CO’s

Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory

4 marks 3 marks 2 marks 1 mark

Prepared By Suggested By Verified By Recommended By

Course Course Module Coordinator Programme

Instructors Coordinator Coordinator

A.Shenbagharam A.Shenbaghara Dr.S.Maheswari,AssoProf/ Dr.V.Gomathi,

Signature an, AP/CSE man, AP/CSE CSE Prof & Head,
Dr.M.Jayalakshmi,AP(SG)/ CSE
CSE