> Other test providers have said they use human assessors
No, the article clearly states that the test in question used voice recognition on a computer. Other companies use human evaluations, however this one didn't.
Unless this is something very recent in which case I am not sure how computers can handle accents or ambiguous words. Even google's voice to text has so many errors on untrained voice models
That's not what I understood from the article, which says
"uses voice recognition technology to test speaking ability, with audio recordings then marked by a “scoring engine”"
"Other test providers have said they use human assessors to determine if people are competent speakers of English"
Both of those imply there aren't humans evaluating the results at this test provider.
That's the entire point of the article.
We got very thorough, specialised prep from our teachers. Everyone passed , first try.
IELTS raised the fees more than 300% in the last few years. They now cost around $330 per exam and they always invariably fail you the first time around. You are allowed to take as many tests as you need. Conveniently you pass after a few tries.
I know competent English teachers who grew up in Australia failing this test few times. And equally I know very few migrants from third world countries passing the test even if English is their first language.
It's more of a blatant money making scheme than anything else and quite obviously the department of immigration must charge IELTS for allowing it to be one of the English examiner.
Just follow the money and you have all the answers.