The ISTQB Advanced Test Automation Engineer Certificate Course is a three-day course explaining the tasks of a test automation engineer (TAE) in designing, developing, and maintaining test automation solutions.
The course includes exercises and practice exams to highlight key aspects of the syllabus and to help participants understand and practice the concepts and methods presented. The exam is held in the afternoon on the last day of the course.
Who will benefit?
TheSTQB Advanced Test Automation Engineer is principally aimed at test practitioners who have achieved an advanced point in their careers in software testing and are expecting to be actively involved in the technical aspects of software testing, including test automation, non-functional testing, white-box testing, and who want to increase their knowledge and skills beyond the levels covered by the Foundation and Intermediate qualifications. This includes people in roles such as testers, test analysts, test engineers, test consultants, test managers, user acceptance testers and software developers.
This Advanced Level qualification is also appropriate for anyone who wants a deeper understanding of software testing, such as project managers, quality managers, software development managers, business analysts and management consultants.
About ISTQB and the ‘Certified Tester’ Scheme
Founded in 2002, ISTQB (International Software Testing Qualifications Board) is a not-for-profit association comprising 47 national boards (including the UKTB) covering 71 countries worldwide.
ISTQB has defined the Advanced certification as part of their ‘Certified Tester’ scheme that, with over 240,000 certifications, has become the de facto world-wide standard for software testing qualifications.
The ‘Certified Tester’ scheme:
provides a set of professional qualifications widely-recognised by employers, customers and peers;
enables software suppliers to hire and train certified testers and thereby gain commercial advantage over their competitors by advertising their tester recruitment and development policies; and
enables comparison of testing skills across different countries, testers to move across country borders more easily, and multi-national/international projects to have a common understanding of testing issues.
Entry Requirements
The entry requirements for the Certified Tester Advanced Level Technical Test Analyst qualification are that the candidate must hold the ISTQB Foundation certificate and it is also suggested that candidates have a minimum of 3 years testing experience.
Note that it is recommended that you attend an accredited training course run by an accredited training provider, as the overall exam pass rates are notably higher for candidates attending such courses.
Exam
The Advanced Level Test Automation Engineer exam is comprised of 40 multiple choice questions, with a pass mark grade of 65% to be completed within 90 minutes. Participants that take the exam not in their spoken language, will receive additional 25% time, and will have 23 minutes more, or a total of 113 min.
Next steps
The Advanced Level establishes a platform from which further skills and knowledge may be acquired at the Expert Level. Holders of the Advanced Technical Test Analyst qualification will be eligible to continue with other Advanced exams as well as progressing to Expert level qualifications, such as Test Automation and Security Testing. More details to follow when available.
Course Objectives
Advanced Level testers who have passed the “Advanced Test Automation Engineer” module exam should be able to accomplish the following Business Objectives:
Contribute to the development of a plan to integrate automated testing within the testing process
Evaluate tools and technology for automation best fit to each project and organization.
Create an approach and methodology for building a test automation architecture (TAA).
Design and develop (new or modified) test automation solutions that meet the business needs.
Enable the transition of testing from a manual to an automated approach.
Create automated test reporting and metrics collection.
Manage and optimize testing assets to facilitate maintainability and address evolving (test) systems.
Certified Advanced Test Automation Engineers should be able to demonstrate their skills in the following areas:
Explain the objectives, advantages, disadvantages, and limitations of test automation.
Identify technical success factors of a test automation project.
Analyse a system under test to determine the appropriate automation solution.
Analyse test automation tools for a given project and report technical findings and recommendations.
Understand “design for testability” and “design for test automation” methods applicable to the SUT.
Explain the structure of the Generic Test Automation Architecture.
Analyse factors of implementation, use, and maintenance requirements for a given Test Automation Solution.
Explain the factors to be considered when identifying reusability of components.
Apply guidelines that support effective test tool pilot and deployment activities.
Analyse deployment risks and identify technical issues that could lead to failure of the test automation project, and plan mitigation strategies.
Understand which factors support and affect maintainability.
Classify metrics that can be used to monitor the test automation strategy and effectiveness.
Explain how a test execution report is constructed and published.
Apply criteria for determining the suitability of tests for automation.
Understand the factors in transitioning from manual to automation testing.
Explain the factors to consider in implementing automated regression testing, new feature testing, and confirmation testing.
Verify the correctness of an automated test environment including test tool setup.
Verify the correct behaviour for a given automated test script and/or test suite.
Analyse the technical aspects of a deployed test automation solution and provide recommendations for improvement.
Syllabus – Key points
33 reviews for ISTQB Advanced Test Automation Engineer
Rated 4 out of 5
Ahsan Mumtaz|Senior Test Engineer|Clarksons –
It was good, however, I would expect more practical scenarios of the real world instead of just going through the theory. However, it covers the certification exam, syllabus. But I feel it should cover real world scenario
Rated 5 out of 5
Dale Bennett|Tes tEngineer|AVEVA –
Very good and informative, thank you
Rated 5 out of 5
George Selway|Software Tester Apprentice|Sedgemoor District Council –
Good course in general however I found many of the examples/scenarios had too much ambiguity to allow facilitate a confident answer. One feels you have to come up with an answer which is always based on individual assumptions. Concerned that some of the exam questions have similar issues.
Rated 4 out of 5
Jodie Cain|Apprentice Software Tester|Bullet Digital Solutions –
This was a resit of a course taken in 2019however due to lockdown I was unable to sit the exam. The course has been re written and delivered through a series of mind maps and this format is much clearer and I found it easier to understand the concepts. I enjoyed the course this time around and feel much more confident about taking the exam.
Rated 4 out of 5
Ahsan Mumtaz | Senior Engineer | Clarksons –
It was good, however, I would expect more practical scenarios of the real world instead of just going through the theory. However, it covers the certification exam, syllabus. But I feel it should cover real world scenario
Rated 5 out of 5
Johanna Booth|Quality Engineer|Lloyds Banking Group –
Course was delivered in a way which was always interesting and upbeat (important given that we did it online)
The course itself is challenging and intense but could ask questions and go over things at any time.
Rated 5 out of 5
Saleh Alamer|Testing Engineer|Advanced Electronics Company –
Excellent
Rated 5 out of 5
Robert Villars|Test Manager|LLoyds Banking Group –
Very helpful tips as well as a thorough review of the content of the course. Far more thorough than other courses I have been on. Great explanations.
Rated 5 out of 5
PRIYA B|TEST ENGINEER| –
Complete coverage of the topics in course explained in an excellent way.
Rated 5 out of 5
Naomi Endersby|Test Specialist|IBM –
Course was good but hard work. John’s writing left a bit to be desired – couldn’t read it sometimes but otherwise excellent. Could do with more tangible examples as concepts and theory are difficult to visualise.
Rated 5 out of 5
Alex Reynolds ||QE Engineer ||Lloyds –
The course was really good, John really knew his stuff and made it accessible and was able to pepper it with personal experience. This really brought the material to life.
I personally loved the Mind Maps and see these as an invaluable resource. Although it would have been great to be able to print these out to allow attendees to annotate with their own notes.
I also would have preferred more opportunities to work with those on the course in group sessions. However the GoTo Meeting system being used was unable to support break out rooms. I feel this would really have helped discussions and learning, although John did a great job of facilitating conversations with the attendees.
Rated 5 out of 5
Richard Goodwin|Senior Software Testing Engineer|Renishaw –
Good pace of course and content. Knowledgeable and good examples used. Trainer installed confidence in my ability to potentially pass the exam
Rated 5 out of 5
Lewis Ridings|IT Test Specialist|IBM –
The course was very informative and introduced the area of test automation very well. It was tailored very much towards Software Testing as expected given it is part of the ITSQB syllabus, however a lot of the concepts were explained very well in relation to all areas of testing, be it infrastructure, cloud etc. and very well related to agile methodologies. John was an excellent teacher, he is very personable and friendly and manages to keep the content interesting despite it being a lot of information in a short period of time. His teaching method worked well for a virtual offering, where adaptations to teach content through a web function worked as well as a classroom offering.
Rated 5 out of 5
Samantha McKee|Assistant Test Manager|KPMG –
Was really good information and helped me place a lot of words to things I have been doing currently. The instructor was very helpful and he has ensured I am prepared for the exam and next steps.
Rated 5 out of 5
Conor Wilson|QE|Lloyds –
Good material, however purely virtual learning is challenging, the past papers helped the most
Rated 5 out of 5
Judy Yu|Quality engineer|Lloyds –
Excellent
Rated 5 out of 5
Karen Wareing|Quality Engineer|Lloyds –
I found the course very interesting and learnt a lot. It was paced well and John always made sure that everyone understood before moving onto the next part of the course. He went through the exam questions in detail explaining which answer was correct and why and why the other answers were not the best answer. I thought it would be difficult to concentrate with it been a virtual course WFH but I actually preferred it. It was a shame that we couldn’t print off the mind maps as I would have preferred to have been able to make notes on them to use for revision. It would have been good to be advised that some of the documents we were sent prior to the course weren’t able to be printed off as I thought it was an issue with my printer and wasted time trying to sort it out.
Rated 5 out of 5
ALAN BISHOP|QUALITY ENGINEER|LLOYDS BANKING GROUP –
Although a lot to cover and take in over three days, it was broken down nicely and covered and gone through clearly by the tutor. Tutor great at answering questions and explaining areas until it was understood.
Rated 5 out of 5
Jennifer Kwan|Quality Engineer|Lloyds Banking Group through outside company –
Excellent trainer, able to explain things well, any questions were answered well as well. Great examples as well that helped highlight and explain things in a manner that was understandable.
Rated 5 out of 5
Bob Metcalfe|Quality Engineer|Lloyds Banking Group –
John was an excellent trainer, clearly walking us through the syllabus in an easy to understand way, with plenty of opportunities to undertake practical application of learning through past exam papers and scenarios. He frequently validated that everyone on the course was clear before we moved onto the next section and provided some helpful tips on how to revise and prepare for the exam.
Rated 4 out of 5
Claire Meikleham|Quality Engineer|LBG –
A lot of theory so it is a tough few days. Particularly enjoyed the exam type questions and the discussions around why the other options were not the correct answer. Felt this was very beneficial to my understanding.
Rated 5 out of 5
David McGechie | |Quality Engineer|LBG –
tough going in a virtual classroom collaboration and contribution from all parties was reduced. content & delivery was great and at a pace that was good for me
Rated 5 out of 5
Linda Perry|Quality Engineer|Lloyds Banking Group –
Intense but very well presented with good explanations and examples along the way
Rated 4 out of 5
Claire Meikleham | Quality Engineer |LBG –
A lot of theory so it is a tough few days. Particularly enjoyed the exam type questions and the discussions around why the other options were not the correct answer. Felt this was very beneficial to my understanding.
Rated 5 out of 5
David McGechie | Quality Engineer |LBG –
tough going in a virtual classroom collaboration and contribution from all parties was reduced. content & delivery was great and at a pace that was good for me
Rated 5 out of 5
Linda Perry | Quality Engineer |Lloyds Banking Group –
Intense but very well presented with good explanations and examples along the way
Rated 4 out of 5
Conor Wilson | QE |Lloyds –
Good material, however purely virtual learning is challenging, the past papers helped the most
Rated 5 out of 5
Karen Wareing | Quality Engineer |Lloyds –
I found the course very interesting and learnt a lot. It was paced well and John always made sure that everyone understood before moving onto the next part of the course. He went through the exam questions in detail explaining which answer was correct and why and why the other answers were not the best answer. I thought it would be difficult to concentrate with it been a virtual course WFH but I actually preferred it. It was a shame that we couldn’t print off the mind maps as I would have preferred to have been able to make notes on them to use for revision. It would have been good to be advised that some of the documents we were sent prior to the course weren’t able to be printed off as I thought it was an issue with my printer and wasted time trying to sort it out.
Rated 5 out of 5
ALAN BISHOP | QUALITY ENGINEER |LLOYDS BANKING GROUP –
Although a lot to cover and take in over three days, it was broken down nicely and covered and gone through clearly by the tutor. Tutor great at answering questions and explaining areas until it was understood.
Rated 5 out of 5
Jennifer Kwan | Quality Engineer |Lloyds Banking Group through outside company –
Excellent trainer, able to explain things well, any questions were answered well as well. Great examples as well that helped highlight and explain things in a manner that was understandable.
Rated 5 out of 5
Bob Metcalfe | Quality Engineer |Lloyds Banking Group –
John was an excellent trainer, clearly walking us through the syllabus in an easy to understand way, with plenty of opportunities to undertake practical application of learning through past exam papers and scenarios. He frequently validated that everyone on the course was clear before we moved onto the next section and provided some helpful tips on how to revise and prepare for the exam.
Rated 4 out of 5
Ankita Singh | Assistant Manager |KPMG –
Trainer is having good understanding of automation testing processes. She delivered the course very well and discussed the queries well too.
Rated 5 out of 5
Victoria Holmes | Senior UAT Analyst |Link Group –
Very well articulated for the different levels of experience of the course attendees. Understanding provided when incorrect answers given, weren’t left feeling silly. Considering it is hard to stay focused when the course is online, she did well to keep us engaged. It was well structured with small regular breaks.
If you're interested in a private course on-site or off-site for you and your team, then please fill out the form below and we will get back to you as soon as possible
Ahsan Mumtaz|Senior Test Engineer|Clarksons –
It was good, however, I would expect more practical scenarios of the real world instead of just going through the theory. However, it covers the certification exam, syllabus. But I feel it should cover real world scenario
Dale Bennett|Tes tEngineer|AVEVA –
Very good and informative, thank you
George Selway|Software Tester Apprentice|Sedgemoor District Council –
Good course in general however I found many of the examples/scenarios had too much ambiguity to allow facilitate a confident answer. One feels you have to come up with an answer which is always based on individual assumptions. Concerned that some of the exam questions have similar issues.
Jodie Cain|Apprentice Software Tester|Bullet Digital Solutions –
This was a resit of a course taken in 2019however due to lockdown I was unable to sit the exam. The course has been re written and delivered through a series of mind maps and this format is much clearer and I found it easier to understand the concepts. I enjoyed the course this time around and feel much more confident about taking the exam.
Ahsan Mumtaz | Senior Engineer | Clarksons –
It was good, however, I would expect more practical scenarios of the real world instead of just going through the theory. However, it covers the certification exam, syllabus. But I feel it should cover real world scenario
Johanna Booth|Quality Engineer|Lloyds Banking Group –
Course was delivered in a way which was always interesting and upbeat (important given that we did it online)
The course itself is challenging and intense but could ask questions and go over things at any time.
Saleh Alamer|Testing Engineer|Advanced Electronics Company –
Excellent
Robert Villars|Test Manager|LLoyds Banking Group –
Very helpful tips as well as a thorough review of the content of the course. Far more thorough than other courses I have been on. Great explanations.
PRIYA B|TEST ENGINEER| –
Complete coverage of the topics in course explained in an excellent way.
Naomi Endersby|Test Specialist|IBM –
Course was good but hard work. John’s writing left a bit to be desired – couldn’t read it sometimes but otherwise excellent. Could do with more tangible examples as concepts and theory are difficult to visualise.
Alex Reynolds ||QE Engineer ||Lloyds –
The course was really good, John really knew his stuff and made it accessible and was able to pepper it with personal experience. This really brought the material to life.
I personally loved the Mind Maps and see these as an invaluable resource. Although it would have been great to be able to print these out to allow attendees to annotate with their own notes.
I also would have preferred more opportunities to work with those on the course in group sessions. However the GoTo Meeting system being used was unable to support break out rooms. I feel this would really have helped discussions and learning, although John did a great job of facilitating conversations with the attendees.
Richard Goodwin|Senior Software Testing Engineer|Renishaw –
Good pace of course and content. Knowledgeable and good examples used. Trainer installed confidence in my ability to potentially pass the exam
Lewis Ridings|IT Test Specialist|IBM –
The course was very informative and introduced the area of test automation very well. It was tailored very much towards Software Testing as expected given it is part of the ITSQB syllabus, however a lot of the concepts were explained very well in relation to all areas of testing, be it infrastructure, cloud etc. and very well related to agile methodologies. John was an excellent teacher, he is very personable and friendly and manages to keep the content interesting despite it being a lot of information in a short period of time. His teaching method worked well for a virtual offering, where adaptations to teach content through a web function worked as well as a classroom offering.
Samantha McKee|Assistant Test Manager|KPMG –
Was really good information and helped me place a lot of words to things I have been doing currently. The instructor was very helpful and he has ensured I am prepared for the exam and next steps.
Conor Wilson|QE|Lloyds –
Good material, however purely virtual learning is challenging, the past papers helped the most
Judy Yu|Quality engineer|Lloyds –
Excellent
Karen Wareing|Quality Engineer|Lloyds –
I found the course very interesting and learnt a lot. It was paced well and John always made sure that everyone understood before moving onto the next part of the course. He went through the exam questions in detail explaining which answer was correct and why and why the other answers were not the best answer. I thought it would be difficult to concentrate with it been a virtual course WFH but I actually preferred it. It was a shame that we couldn’t print off the mind maps as I would have preferred to have been able to make notes on them to use for revision. It would have been good to be advised that some of the documents we were sent prior to the course weren’t able to be printed off as I thought it was an issue with my printer and wasted time trying to sort it out.
ALAN BISHOP|QUALITY ENGINEER|LLOYDS BANKING GROUP –
Although a lot to cover and take in over three days, it was broken down nicely and covered and gone through clearly by the tutor. Tutor great at answering questions and explaining areas until it was understood.
Jennifer Kwan|Quality Engineer|Lloyds Banking Group through outside company –
Excellent trainer, able to explain things well, any questions were answered well as well. Great examples as well that helped highlight and explain things in a manner that was understandable.
Bob Metcalfe|Quality Engineer|Lloyds Banking Group –
John was an excellent trainer, clearly walking us through the syllabus in an easy to understand way, with plenty of opportunities to undertake practical application of learning through past exam papers and scenarios. He frequently validated that everyone on the course was clear before we moved onto the next section and provided some helpful tips on how to revise and prepare for the exam.
Claire Meikleham|Quality Engineer|LBG –
A lot of theory so it is a tough few days. Particularly enjoyed the exam type questions and the discussions around why the other options were not the correct answer. Felt this was very beneficial to my understanding.
David McGechie | |Quality Engineer|LBG –
tough going in a virtual classroom collaboration and contribution from all parties was reduced. content & delivery was great and at a pace that was good for me
Linda Perry|Quality Engineer|Lloyds Banking Group –
Intense but very well presented with good explanations and examples along the way
Claire Meikleham | Quality Engineer |LBG –
A lot of theory so it is a tough few days. Particularly enjoyed the exam type questions and the discussions around why the other options were not the correct answer. Felt this was very beneficial to my understanding.
David McGechie | Quality Engineer |LBG –
tough going in a virtual classroom collaboration and contribution from all parties was reduced. content & delivery was great and at a pace that was good for me
Linda Perry | Quality Engineer |Lloyds Banking Group –
Intense but very well presented with good explanations and examples along the way
Conor Wilson | QE |Lloyds –
Good material, however purely virtual learning is challenging, the past papers helped the most
Karen Wareing | Quality Engineer |Lloyds –
I found the course very interesting and learnt a lot. It was paced well and John always made sure that everyone understood before moving onto the next part of the course. He went through the exam questions in detail explaining which answer was correct and why and why the other answers were not the best answer. I thought it would be difficult to concentrate with it been a virtual course WFH but I actually preferred it. It was a shame that we couldn’t print off the mind maps as I would have preferred to have been able to make notes on them to use for revision. It would have been good to be advised that some of the documents we were sent prior to the course weren’t able to be printed off as I thought it was an issue with my printer and wasted time trying to sort it out.
ALAN BISHOP | QUALITY ENGINEER |LLOYDS BANKING GROUP –
Although a lot to cover and take in over three days, it was broken down nicely and covered and gone through clearly by the tutor. Tutor great at answering questions and explaining areas until it was understood.
Jennifer Kwan | Quality Engineer |Lloyds Banking Group through outside company –
Excellent trainer, able to explain things well, any questions were answered well as well. Great examples as well that helped highlight and explain things in a manner that was understandable.
Bob Metcalfe | Quality Engineer |Lloyds Banking Group –
John was an excellent trainer, clearly walking us through the syllabus in an easy to understand way, with plenty of opportunities to undertake practical application of learning through past exam papers and scenarios. He frequently validated that everyone on the course was clear before we moved onto the next section and provided some helpful tips on how to revise and prepare for the exam.
Ankita Singh | Assistant Manager |KPMG –
Trainer is having good understanding of automation testing processes. She delivered the course very well and discussed the queries well too.
Victoria Holmes | Senior UAT Analyst |Link Group –
Very well articulated for the different levels of experience of the course attendees. Understanding provided when incorrect answers given, weren’t left feeling silly. Considering it is hard to stay focused when the course is online, she did well to keep us engaged. It was well structured with small regular breaks.