Essential prep shift if your speaking test is AI-marked
TOEFL iBT uses AI tools called SpeechRater to score Speaking responses. PTE Academic has been fully computer-marked since launch. IELTS is trialling AI assistance in selected markets, but a human examiner still controls the final score. For TOEFL and PTE, the mark on your Speaking section comes entirely from a machine. And the machine does not listen the way a person does.
Pace: words per minute and pause length
The system tracks how many words you produce per minute and how long your pauses are. A natural speaking rate of around 110 to 150 words per minute scores better than rushing or speaking slowly. Silences longer than 2 to 3 seconds register as hesitation and lower your fluency score regardless of what you say when you resume.
Pronunciation: pattern matching, not accent
The AI does not penalise accents. It checks whether the sounds you produce match recognisable phonetic patterns in English. Consonant clusters and word-final sounds matter most. Consistently dropping the final consonant of words, saying 'tes' instead of 'test' or 'nex' instead of 'next', is noted across every word in your response and lowers your pronunciation score cumulatively.
Filler words: they are counted
Um, uh, like, you know. A human examiner tolerates occasional fillers as natural speech. The AI counts them. A high ratio of disfluencies to total words directly lowers your fluency score. A brief pause scores better than a filler sound. Most students use far more fillers than they realise until they listen back to a recording.
Vocabulary and grammar: range matters
The AI compares the vocabulary and sentence structures in your response against a large bank of scored student speech. It rewards lexical variety and syntactic complexity. Repeating the same words or using the same sentence pattern for every answer lowers your range score. Starting every response with 'I think that...' and building the same structure each time is exactly the kind of low-range signal the system flags.
Relevance: staying on topic
The system checks whether your response addresses what was asked. Rephrasing the question back to yourself, going off on a tangent, or producing content that does not connect to the prompt are all penalised. Under a 45-second response window, this is where anxious candidates most often drift.
A human IELTS examiner reads your overall communicative effectiveness. They notice when you recover gracefully from a stumble, when you handle a complex topic with obvious skill, or when your delivery has a natural quality that shows genuine fluency. That holistic impression does not factor into an AI-marked test.
The AI sees patterns and counts deviations. A candidate who sounds polished to a human ear but uses eight filler words in a 45-second response will score lower than they expect. A candidate who sounds mechanical but uses varied vocabulary with clean consonants and a consistent pace may score higher than a human examiner would rate them. Both outcomes are real, and both catch students off guard.
The filler word problem is bigger than most students think
In a 60-second TOEFL response, a student who uses 'um' or 'uh' ten times is producing a filler roughly every six seconds. That is a high disfluency ratio and the AI scores it accordingly. Record yourself answering a practice question and count your fillers. The number is almost always higher than expected. The fix is not to stop speaking. It is to replace the filler with a short silence.
How to train specifically for AI-marked speaking
Go deeper
AI Is Now an IELTS Speaking Topic. Here Is How to Answer It.
Machines don't just mark your speaking now, they're a question topic too. Here is how to talk about AI in your IELTS Speaking test.
Read it →Did this help?
Ready to practise this? Practice TOEFL Writing →
About the author
Muskan
Co-founder, WizardTeacher · Content and curriculum lead
Muskan is co-founder of WizardTeacher and leads all content and curriculum development. She researches exam formats, marking criteria, and preparation strategies to ensure every resource on WizardTeacher is grounded in what the examiners actually reward.