This is a fascinating blog posting (and subsequent postings and comments). I find this topic intriguing because I can also see your point here regarding being independent.
I've just recently finished a high profile government eVoting project where I was very strict at times for compliance, requirement matrix analysis and any other 'analytic' testing theory/concept. Yet, at times throughout the project I slipped in to Agile testing mode, exploratory testing mode and any other which could form a school or fit in with the defined list provided by James.
Does this make me a bad pupil? Am I a truant from each school everytime I slip in to another school?
I can totally see the benefit of people belonging to schools but I do agree that it could potentially narrow your thinking.
At the school I attended certain elements would fight other schools at lunch time, just because they went to a different school. Will we ever see that in testing, will schools become so isolated an narrow minded that they start to belittle, degrade and be unaccepting to others - I really hope not - although I have seen this behaviour in places I have worked. 'He practices exploratory testing - he is therefore not analytical and has a low attention to detail". I've even heard this sort of talk at management level.
I too like the ability to be independent. Maybe the middle ground is to attend more than one school?
I personally believe testing is a mindset, a belief and a practice that rides above 'techniques, types and schools' and can slide and fit with any process/grouping or even stereotype. I even find myself testing things outside of work and even outside of the software industry (posters, adverts on TV etc.)
This means I find it easy to fit in with the way a company works yet still deliver high quality software.
I'm going to keep track of the topic though cos this has the potential to be a new movement in testing...and who am I to not listen to my idol of testing...James Bach...and you of course Paul...
Interesting posts and discussions
This is a fascinating blog posting (and subsequent postings and comments). I find this topic intriguing because I can also see your point here regarding being independent.
I've just recently finished a high profile government eVoting project where I was very strict at times for compliance, requirement matrix analysis and any other 'analytic' testing theory/concept. Yet, at times throughout the project I slipped in to Agile testing mode, exploratory testing mode and any other which could form a school or fit in with the defined list provided by James.
Does this make me a bad pupil? Am I a truant from each school everytime I slip in to another school?
I can totally see the benefit of people belonging to schools but I do agree that it could potentially narrow your thinking.
At the school I attended certain elements would fight other schools at lunch time, just because they went to a different school. Will we ever see that in testing, will schools become so isolated an narrow minded that they start to belittle, degrade and be unaccepting to others - I really hope not - although I have seen this behaviour in places I have worked. 'He practices exploratory testing - he is therefore not analytical and has a low attention to detail". I've even heard this sort of talk at management level.
I too like the ability to be independent. Maybe the middle ground is to attend more than one school?
I personally believe testing is a mindset, a belief and a practice that rides above 'techniques, types and schools' and can slide and fit with any process/grouping or even stereotype. I even find myself testing things outside of work and even outside of the software industry (posters, adverts on TV etc.)
This means I find it easy to fit in with the way a company works yet still deliver high quality software.
I'm going to keep track of the topic though cos this has the potential to be a new movement in testing...and who am I to not listen to my idol of testing...James Bach...and you of course Paul...
Rob