Skip to content

Week 8 work#13

Merged
aslavchev merged 4 commits intomainfrom
week-8-work
Jan 4, 2026
Merged

Week 8 work#13
aslavchev merged 4 commits intomainfrom
week-8-work

Conversation

@kamenAsenov
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

name: 📚 Week Submission
description: Submit your weekly QA Fundamentals work
body:

  • type: markdown
    attributes:
    value: |
    ## Week Submission
    Complete all sections below for your weekly submission.

  • type: dropdown
    id: week
    attributes:
    label: Week Number
    options:
    - Week 01 - QA Foundations
    - Week 02 - Test Levels
    - Week 03 - Functional Testing
    - Week 04 - Non-Functional Testing
    - Week 05 - Test Design (Basic)
    - Week 06 - Test Design (Advanced)
    - Week 07 - Test Planning
    - Week 08 - Test Case Management
    - Week 09 - Agile Testing & BDD
    - Week 10 - Defect Management
    - Week 11 - Python Basics
    validations:
    required: true

  • type: input
    id: mentee-name
    attributes:
    label: Mentee Name
    placeholder: Your name
    validations:
    required: true

  • type: checkboxes
    id: deliverables
    attributes:
    label: Completed Deliverables
    options:
    - label: All exercises completed
    required: true
    - label: Test cases written (if applicable)
    - label: Bug reports documented (if applicable)
    - label: All files in correct location (mentee-work/week-XX/)
    required: true
    - label: Followed templates from curriculum/templates/
    required: true
    - label: Reviewed my own work for quality
    required: true

  • type: textarea
    id: summary
    attributes:
    label: Summary of Work
    description: Brief description of what you completed this week
    placeholder: This week I focused on...
    validations:
    required: true

  • type: textarea
    id: challenges
    attributes:
    label: Questions or Challenges
    description: Any questions for your mentor or challenges you encountered
    placeholder: I struggled with... / I have questions about...

  • type: textarea
    id: learnings
    attributes:
    label: Key Learnings
    description: What were your main takeaways from this week?
    placeholder: I learned that...
    validations:
    required: true

  • type: input
    id: time-tutorial
    attributes:
    label: Time Spent - Reading Tutorial
    description: Hours spent reading tutorial
    placeholder: "3"

  • type: input
    id: time-exercises
    attributes:
    label: Time Spent - Completing Exercises
    description: Hours spent on exercises
    placeholder: "6"

  • type: input
    id: time-review
    attributes:
    label: Time Spent - Review & Refinement
    description: Hours spent reviewing and refining work
    placeholder: "1"

  • type: input
    id: time-total
    attributes:
    label: Total Time Spent
    description: Total hours this week
    placeholder: "10"
    validations:
    required: true

  • type: dropdown
    id: completeness
    attributes:
    label: Self-Assessment - Completeness
    description: Rate 1-5 (1=needs work, 5=excellent)
    options:
    - "5 - Excellent"
    - "4 - Good"
    - "3 - Satisfactory"
    - "2 - Needs Improvement"
    - "1 - Needs Work"
    validations:
    required: true

  • type: dropdown
    id: quality
    attributes:
    label: Self-Assessment - Quality
    description: Rate 1-5 (1=needs work, 5=excellent)
    options:
    - "5 - Excellent"
    - "4 - Good"
    - "3 - Satisfactory"
    - "2 - Needs Improvement"
    - "1 - Needs Work"
    validations:
    required: true

  • type: dropdown
    id: critical-thinking
    attributes:
    label: Self-Assessment - Critical Thinking
    description: Rate 1-5 (1=needs work, 5=excellent)
    options:
    - "5 - Excellent"
    - "4 - Good"
    - "3 - Satisfactory"
    - "2 - Needs Improvement"
    - "1 - Needs Work"
    validations:
    required: true

  • type: dropdown
    id: professionalism
    attributes:
    label: Self-Assessment - Professionalism
    description: Rate 1-5 (1=needs work, 5=excellent)
    options:
    - "5 - Excellent"
    - "4 - Good"
    - "3 - Satisfactory"
    - "2 - Needs Improvement"
    - "1 - Needs Work"
    validations:
    required: true

  • type: textarea
    id: notes
    attributes:
    label: Additional Notes
    description: Any other information for your mentor

  • type: checkboxes
    id: pre-submit
    attributes:
    label: Pre-Submission Checklist
    options:
    - label: All files committed to mentee-work/week-XX/ folder
    required: true
    - label: Branch named week-XX-your-name
    required: true
    - label: Commit messages are clear and descriptive
    required: true
    - label: Reviewed CONTRIBUTING.md guidelines
    required: false
    - label: Self-reviewed work for quality and completeness
    required: true
    - label: Ready for mentor feedback
    required: true

@aslavchev
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Week 8 Feedback - Let's Level This Up

Status: Needs completion before grading
Time needed: 6-8 hours


What's Already Strong 💪

  • 60 test cases - you hit the volume target
  • TC-LOGIN-010 - that SQL injection test? Interview gold. Seriously.
  • Self-review - your Exercise 5 showed real reflection
  • Organization - module structure is clean and logical

4 Things to Complete

1️⃣ Apply TC-LOGIN-001 Format to All Cases (3-4 hrs)

TC-LOGIN-001 is exactly what I want to see - detailed steps, specific results, clear preconditions. Problem is, most others are abbreviated.

What's missing:

  • Step-by-step tables
  • Specific error messages (not just "error shown")
  • Preconditions for each test

Quick example:

Current ❌ Need ✅
"Validation error shown" "Error: Epic sadface: Username is required"

Action: Apply your TC-LOGIN-001 quality across all 60 test cases.


2️⃣ Fix RTM Numbers (30 min)

Your RTM claims "60 tests mapped, 0 orphaned" but the table only shows 36.

The fix: Add a "Supplementary Tests" section listing the other 24:

  • Security tests (TC-LOGIN-010, TC-LOGIN-015)
  • UI tests (badges, masking, buttons)
  • Navigation tests

Then update summary:

"36 mapped to FRs + 24 supplementary = 60 total ✅"

File: traceability-matrix.md


3️⃣ Test Those XSS Payloads (1 hr)

You documented XSS payloads in test-data-management.md but never used them. You already did SQL injection - just need XSS now.

Add 2-3 test cases:

  • TC-LOGIN-016: XSS attempt on username field
  • TC-CHECKOUT-021: XSS on first name
  • TC-CHECKOUT-022: XSS on last name

💡 Tip: Copy TC-LOGIN-010 structure and swap SQL → XSS.


4️⃣ Finish Exercise 6 (1 hr)

Missing the test-management-organization.md deliverable.

Quick checklist:

  • Create 5-10 test issues in GitHub (manually)
  • Capture 3 screenshots (test list, one issue, board view)
  • Write 2-3 sentences on what you learned

Note: We'll script the remaining 50 issues together later - that's the plan.

File to create: mentee-work/week-08/test-management-organization.md


✅ Resubmit Checklist

  • All 60 test cases match TC-LOGIN-001 detail level
  • RTM shows correct math (36 + 24 = 60)
  • 2-3 XSS test cases added
  • Exercise 6 doc with screenshots submitted

Deadline: Resubmit by Jan 1 (72 hrs)
Turnaround: I'll review and grade within 24 hours


💬 Real Talk

The skills are there - TC-LOGIN-001, your SQL injection test, and that self-review in Exercise 5 prove it. Now it's about applying that same quality everywhere.

Think of this as your portfolio week. When you're interviewing and someone asks "show me a test case you wrote," you want to pull up TC-LOGIN-001 quality, not the abbreviated versions.

Get these fixes done and Week 8 becomes one of your strongest submissions (85-90 range). You've got this.

Questions? Hit me up.

— Alex

@aslavchev
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Week 8 Final Review - Strong Finish 💪

Grade: 90/100 (A-)


What You Nailed ✅

All 4 action items completed:

  1. Test cases standardized - All 63 now match TC-LOGIN-001 quality
  2. RTM math fixed - Clean "Supplementary" category, no orphaned tests
  3. XSS tests added - TC-LOGIN-016, TC-CHECKOUT-021, TC-CHECKOUT-022 (all solid)
  4. Exercise 6 done - Screenshots + reflection included

Bonus: You went from 60 → 63 test cases. That SQL + XSS security thinking? Interview gold.


The Work

  • 63 professional test cases - detailed steps, specific error messages, proper format
  • RTM shows 100% coverage - all 13 requirements mapped, math checks out
  • Exercise 5 self-review - honest reflection, identified real improvements
  • Consistent quality - TC-LOGIN-001 format applied everywhere

This is portfolio-ready work. You could show TC-LOGIN-010 (SQL) or TC-CHECKOUT-021 (XSS) in an interview right now.


Real Talk

You worked through the holidays to get this right. Fixing 60+ test cases over New Year's? That's commitment.

The difference between your first submission and these revisions shows growth. You took feedback, applied it everywhere, and shipped quality. That's the mindset.


What's Next

Week 9: Agile Testing & BDD (ready when you are)

  • Convert test cases to Gherkin scenarios
  • Lighter workload (~5 hours vs Week 8's 8+)
  • Builds directly on your Week 8 test cases

You leveled up this week. The difference between TC-LOGIN-001 and your first drafts shows you know what quality looks like. Now you're applying it at scale.

Merge whenever ready. Let's go Week 9! 🚀

— Alex

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

@aslavchev aslavchev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Week 8 approved - all revisions completed successfully. Grade: 90/100 (A-)

@aslavchev aslavchev merged commit a9b31e9 into main Jan 4, 2026
@aslavchev aslavchev deleted the week-8-work branch January 4, 2026 10:02
aslavchev added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 4, 2026
- Week 8: Test Case Management ✅ Complete
- Grade: 90/100 (A-)
- PR #13 merged Jan 4, 2026
- Progress: 8/11 weeks (73%)
- Average grade: 83.1/100 (up from 82.1)
- Added grade progress bar chart with visual trend
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants