Testing Strategy
You Are Viewing Archived Content
The Kuali Research system went live on January 21, 2020. Visit the Kuali Research (KR) website for current system information and support.Testing determines whether each of the project's software deliverables meets the defined quality standards established for the software development project. The goal is to ensure that the software is production-ready for the go-live date.
The Testing Strategy focuses on scope, purpose, assumptions, overall approach, critical success factors, metrics and test/defect management.
What is being tested?
Scope
- Kuali Research Application Configuration
- Modules: Proposal Development, Institutional Proposal, Negotiation, Award, and Subawards
- Custom fields, Modification, Workflows
- Kuali Reports
- Kuali Dashboard
- Coeus Data Migration
- Data Integration
- UC San Diego Data Analytics of KR Data
Levels of Testing 
- Unit Testing
- Data Migration Testing
- Functional Testing
- System Integration Testing
- Business Process Testing
- Performance Testing
- User Acceptance Testing
Based on the testing scope, the Kuali Research team created the levels of testing to capture tests for all the components necessary to successfully implement production-ready software.
As part of the Testing Strategy, each level has an individual Test Plan, which is focused on the test objectives, assumptions, principles, scope, usability and criteria for that specific level of testing. Each level also has an individual Testing Cases process that encapsulates design, development, execution and test/defect management.
When does testing happening?
Each level of testing listed below includes at least two phases:
Phase 1
Identify any blocking or high-severity defects and use work-arounds to execute all the test cases in the cycle.
Phase 2
Confirm resolutions to previously identified defects and execute test cases that previously required work-arounds.
Corrects gaps in the test cases that were identified during execution of the first test cycle.
| Level of Testing | Description | Phases | Testers |
| Unit Testing | Proves an individual unit of work functions as expected. This is often associated with technical object testing, although it can also be applied to a configuration unit of work. | Ongoing |
KR Technical Team UC San Diego Technical Team |
| Data Migration Testing | Determines the accuracy of data converted from the Coeus solution to the KR solution. Developing the code required to migrate and transform data from one solution to another is an important task, however, checking the results and verifying the accuracy of the data should not be trivialized. |
Phase 1 Phase 2 (4 cycles) |
UC San Diego Technical Team UC San Diego Configuration Team UC San Diego Test Team UC San Diego SMEs KR Consultants |
| Functional Testing | Conducted to test specific KR application modules and data integration’s functionality. Functional testing is not expected to test every discrete permutation of possible values. The UC San Diego Test Team will perform this testing by entering values into the KR application and ensure those values are properly processed and flow to the boundaries of the entire Kuali solution. Discrete test scenarios will be executed to validate existing and new functionality that was introduced into the KR solution are working as designed |
Phase 1 Phase 2 |
UC San Diego Technical Team UC San Diego Configuration Team UC San Diego Test Team UC San Diego SMEs KR Consultants |
| System Integration Testing | Verifies that the KR application can produce comparable results to the Coeus application and that all necessary business functions are incorporated into the KR solution. To increase the accuracy/efficiency of the process of Business Process Testing, the UC San Diego Test Team will utilize an automated test tool to assist with business process testing. |
Phase 1 Phase 2 |
UC San Diego Technical Team UC San Diego Configuration Team UC San Diego Test Team UC San Diego SMEs KR Consultants |
| Business Process Testing | Verifies that the KR application can produce comparable results to the Coeus application and that all necessary business functions are incorporated into the KR solution. To increase the accuracy/efficiency of the process of Business Process Testing, the UC San Diego Test Team will utilize an automated test tool to assist with business process testing. |
Phase 1 Phase 2 |
UC San Diego Technical Team UC San Diego Configuration Team UC San Diego Test Team UC San Diego SMEs KR Consultants |
| KR and WalkMe User Acceptance Testing |
Will be focused on confirming the functional requirements and business processes documented have been met by the KR solution. This testing will also focus on the identified business flows and processes that the integrated systems will support, including the inbound and outbound exchange of data and the smooth and timely flow of information. Unlike earlier testing, the objective of UAT is to prove that the system does work to the satisfaction of the end user community. The level of testing undertaken in Functional Test and SIT should ensure that UAT demonstrates a fully working system in a way that builds the confidence of the end users. There will be some errors, either from use by unfamiliar operators using data entry or key sequences not imagined by the project team, or test cases/scenarios not attempted during earlier testing cycles, but the level of errors should not impact end user confidence adversely. This means that any problems reported should be handled in an efficient and transparent manner. There will be two UAT cycles: The first UAT cycle evaluates the pre-production environment, user training, the user and support documentation and support infrastructure. UAT testers will execute various test scenarios using production ready security profiles. The second UAT cycle will incorporate corrections to errors discovered during testing, updates to user and support documentation and final sign-off. |
User Acceptance |
UC San Diego SMEs KR Consultants (support to testers only) UC San Diego Test Team (support to testers only) UC San Diego Process Lead |
Who tested the system?
| Testing Team | Member | Role |
| UC San Diego SMEs | Chelsea Van Pelt | Subject Matter Expert |
| David Grayson | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Debi Pollard | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Glenn D Saunders | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Jasmyn Hornbuckle | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Jeff Warner | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Jennifer Louie | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Judith A Delos Santos | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Katarina Tang | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Lauren Sanfilippo | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Patricia Pace | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Patricia Williams | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Rachel Cook | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Sennite Meche | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Stephanie Schuck | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Thanhdieu Rich | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Trevor Johnshon | Subject Matter Expert | |
| William Park III | Subject Matter Expert | |
| Technical Team | Robert Dias | Solutions Architect |
| Configuration Team | Jason DeFay | Configuration and Business Process Lead |
| Sunny Kochhar | Business Analysis and Configuration Support | |
| Evan Kerry | Business Analysis and Configuration Support | |
| Test Team | David Edmonson | Testing Lead |
| Long Ton-That | Tester | |
| Bill Sweetman | Director Financial Information Systems | |
| Process Lead | Jason DeFay | Configuration and Business Process Lead |
| Kuali Research Technical Team | Terry Durkin | KualiCo - Technical Lead |
| Kuali Research Consultants | Whit Baird | KualiCo - Project Lead |
| Kat Szulc | KualiCo - Functional Lead | |
| Kaci Foster | KualiCo - General Manager |