At CEWT #5 we used Lean Coffee as a way to reflect on some of the threads we'd discussed during the day. Here's a few brief, aggregated comments and questions that came up.
Can we identify testing short cuts?
- In particular, can we find short cuts without adverse side-effects?
- Short cuts sometimes have assumptions built into them (e.g. that the side gate you're going to use to get into work at the weekend is open then.)
- Some of the things you used to hold as axiomatic are no longer relevant so you can short cut your old thinking.
- Can the shortness be in depth rather than length?
- ... and you can gain breadth first, as a kind of short cut in testing.
- You can plan training to isolate particular skills and short cut potential confusion.
- You can tell someone they'll waste their time trying something, based on your experience.
- But you might deny them some learning.
- And you deny them the opportunity to learn to recognise a waste of time.
- All your learning can't be short cuts.
- Heuristics are just short cuts.
- They're potential short cuts.
- Is reflection a short cut?
- Is pairing a short cut?
- Are you after short cuts for learning how to test, or short cuts to the results of testing?
- Can you get short cuts by distributing skills across a team?
- Perhaps a framework in which to test is a short cut, so wheels are not reinvented every time.
Thinking is practice?
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Thinking about why you're doing things is practice.
- If it's not important, that's practice.
- It just is practice.
- Watching videos as prep for playing a sport is practice.
- Do you notice your muscles moving when doing that?
- Visualisation of future actions is common in sport.
- Neurologically, doing and thinking are similar.
- Make your testing thinking visible (or audible) and others can learn from it.
- The Kolb Cycle says thinking is practice.
- Exercising mentally is directly analagous to exercising physically.
- Testing requirements (by thinking) is testing (which is practice).
Does it make sense to talk about "best theories"?
- If it is a theory, in the scientific sense, then it's held up to the most cross-examination.
- And in the non-scientific sense?
- "Best" compared to what?
- Are there any good default theories?
- People hold up the Spotify model as a best theory but even they say to make your own.
- What makes a good theory?
- It's justifiable, relevant, testable, valuable, explainable.
- At which point does data and become theory?
- When something tacit becomes explicit.
- When you need it.
- When it give you an answer.
Comments
Post a Comment