// Interview Prep/Prep plans/7-Day Manual QA Prep Plan

๐Ÿ—“๏ธ 7-Day Manual QA Prep Plan

Junior-to-mid QA engineers preparing for a structured Manual QA interview loop. Assumes you have some testing exposure โ€” this plan sharpens your test-design instincts, builds interview-ready examples, and targets the specific question banks interviewers use for manual and exploratory testing rounds.

7 days~1โ€“2 hrs/dayยทmanual qa role page โ†’

// GOAL

Arrive at the Manual QA interview with sharp test-design technique, structured exploratory testing habits, high-quality bug reports, and confident answers to questions on testing fundamentals, defect lifecycle, JIRA, and SQL.

Phases010203

// THE PLAN

01Days 1โ€“2 โ€” Foundations

Build a precise mental model of testing types, the defect lifecycle, and the SDLC

// STUDY

  • Testing types and where each fits: smoke, sanity, regression, exploratory, UAT โ€” and why interviewers test your vocabulary precisely, not just that you know the words
  • SDLC models: Waterfall, V-model, Agile โ€” where testing sits in each, what 'shift left' means in practice, and how test planning changes with each model
  • The defect lifecycle: new โ†’ open โ†’ assigned โ†’ fixed โ†’ retest โ†’ closed; when to reopen and why escalation paths matter for communication with developers
  • Test case anatomy: objective, preconditions, steps, expected result, actual result, severity โ€” and why each field earns its place when a developer challenges your findings

// PRACTISE

  • Read the Manual QA role page and list the 3 topic areas where your current answers feel least confident โ€” these become your re-study targets on Days 6โ€“7
  • For a login screen, name 5 testing types that apply (e.g. smoke, regression, exploratory) and write one sentence explaining what each type would verify โ€” practise precision
  • Write 3 practice bug reports for imagined defects: each must have a crisp title, a correct severity vs priority split, and steps to reproduce that a developer could follow without asking a follow-up question

Deliverable

A written list of your 3 weakest topic areas and 3 practice bug reports you would be comfortable showing an interviewer โ€” these feed directly into Days 6โ€“7.

02Days 3โ€“5 โ€” Test design and exploratory

Master the techniques interviewers build exercises around

// STUDY

  • Equivalence partitioning: dividing valid and invalid input classes for a field, deriving the minimum representative test set โ€” practise with worked examples, not just definitions
  • Boundary-value analysis: testing at, just below, and just above partition boundaries โ€” understanding why off-by-one bugs hide precisely there
  • Decision tables: modelling multi-condition business rules as a truth table โ€” when they beat a list of test cases, and how to build one for a discount or permissions rule
  • Exploratory testing: writing a time-boxed session charter, applying SFDIPOT heuristics to guide exploration, and structuring a 5-minute debrief that communicates findings clearly

// PRACTISE

  • Take a registration form with 4 fields (email, password, phone number, date of birth): apply equivalence partitioning and boundary-value analysis to derive a minimal high-coverage test set โ€” write it out as structured test cases, not a checklist
  • Write a decision table for a discount rule: '10% off if order value > ยฃ50 and the customer is a loyalty member; free shipping if order value > ยฃ100, regardless of membership' โ€” list every unique rule combination
  • Run a 25-minute exploratory session on any public web app using a written charter before you start; debrief in 5 minutes and log your top 3 findings as structured bug reports with title, severity, priority, and steps

Deliverable

A completed decision table, a minimum valid test set from EP and BVA for the registration form, and 3 structured bug reports from your exploratory session.

03Days 6โ€“7 โ€” Review and mock

Close knowledge gaps and simulate the interview under time pressure

// STUDY

  • JIRA: defect workflow states, JQL filtering basics for locating open bugs by severity or assignee, Zephyr test cycles and how to report test progress to a stakeholder who asks for a status update
  • SQL basics for QA: SELECT with WHERE, JOIN across two tables, GROUP BY with COUNT โ€” practise the queries interviewers set to verify test data after a data migration or a write-heavy feature
  • Behavioural questions: a developer disputes your bug, a deadline cuts regression scope, a feature ships without sign-off โ€” practise structured STAR answers before the interview, not during it
  • Re-read the 2 question banks that correspond to your weakest topics identified on Day 1

// PRACTISE

  • Answer 10 questions aloud from the manual testing, test design, and scenario question banks โ€” time yourself at 90 seconds per answer and note every question where you paused
  • Identify your 5 weakest answers and write a worked example for each, grounding it in a real or realistic project situation rather than an abstract definition
  • Ask a colleague or friend to run a 30-minute mock: given a simple feature brief, produce structured test cases and one bug report, then debrief your exploratory approach โ€” replicate interview conditions without notes

Deliverable

Written answers to your 5 weakest questions, grounded in concrete examples โ€” plus a pass/fail verdict from your mock exercise.

04Day 14 โ€” Mock task

Capstone: simulate the technical interview task

Mock task

Set a 40-minute timer. You receive a brief for a hotel-booking search form: destination (free text), check-in date, check-out date, number of guests (1โ€“8), room type (single / double / suite). Part 1 (15 minutes): apply equivalence partitioning and boundary-value analysis to derive a structured test set โ€” define each input class, its boundaries, and a representative test case for each. Cover valid inputs, invalid inputs, boundary values, and at least one cross-field combination (e.g. check-out before check-in). Part 2 (20 minutes): run a time-boxed exploratory session against any public web search or booking form using a written charter ('Explore the search flow, focusing on date validation, boundary inputs, and error-message quality'). Log your top 3 findings as structured bug reports. Part 3 (5 minutes): write a debrief โ€” what you tested, what you did NOT test, and what you would do next given more time. No notes, no reference material โ€” simulating interview conditions throughout.