They should be involved in reviewing requirements or user stories as soon as drafts are available is the option that represents good testing practice for testers, irrespective of the software lifecycle model used, because it allows testers to provide early feedback, identify potential defects, and clarify test objectives and scope1 . Early involvement of testers in reviewing requirements or user stories can improve the quality and testability of the software and reduce the cost and effort of testing1 . The other options do not represent good testing practice for testers, irrespective of the software lifecycle model used. Option A is not a good option, because they should start test analysis as early as possible, not when the corresponding development level is complete, to avoid delays and inefficiencies in testing1 . Option C is not a good option, because they should ensure that different test objectives apply to each test level, not the same test objectives, to avoid redundancy and gaps in testing1 . Option D is not a good option, because they should minimize the ratio of development levels to test levels to reduce project costs, but rather balance the development and test levels according to the project needs and risks1 .