ABSTRACT
When Kenneth Goodman introduced miscue analysis in the 1960s, he often contextualized his essays on the topic by situating miscue analysis against the backdrop of scientific change and fundamental shifts in the knowledge base for the field of reading (e.g., Goodman, [1967] 1982; [1975] 1982). In short, Goodman was arguing for epistemic change in the field of reading and used miscue analysis and the findings from it as evidence for his arguments. Over 40 years later, there is no doubt of the impact of miscue analysis on the field of reading and on reading assessment in particular. Not only did miscue analysis become so widely used that, within a relatively short period of time (in 1974), the ERIC database introduced it as a descriptor, but its pervasiveness is now such that even those who hold theoretically different views than Goodman’s talk about reading with language that is permeated with the language of miscue analysis (e.g., Hall, 2003).
