To Err is Human: Learning Language Processes by Analyzing Miscues
By Yetta M. Goodman and Kenneth S. Goodman

Susan Conklin for
Michael’s Class and the relaxation of the need to be perfect

Goodman and Goodman recognize that people are not perfect. In looking at the power of language, they highlight our use of language fills in the gaps of missing elements in the construction of knowledge. Language allows us to infer unstated meanings, underlying structures, deal with novel experiences, novel thoughts, and novel emotions in order to predict, guess, make choices, take risks, go beyond observable data.

Their assumption is that everything that happens during reading is caused and that unexpected responses come from the same place as expected responses. Reading aloud involves continuous oral response by the reader as meaning is constructed. This reveals the readers’ process and underlying competence.

Effective analysis of the miscues includes text long enough to generate a sufficient number of miscues. The text must be challenging and if readers hesitate for more than 30 seconds, they are urged to guess and if hesitation persists, they are told to keep reading even if they miss a word or phrase.


Readers receive more than one reading task and different text structures. Research applies to more than one language. Examples are included in this article of the text and of the miscued transcript. An assessment revealed differences between reasonable miscues for meaning and grammar hence semantically acceptable miscues reveal approaches toward comprehension marked by cognitive effort in the face of confusion.

Miscue has meaning. Analysis of miscues lets us know what the reader comprehends and what they are not. The reader’s ability to predict and confirm their predictions with the use of strategies is evident. Are the predictions logical? Does the reader self-correct? How does the reader use pronouns? Why did the reader make this particular miscue?

Researchers examined retellings as a way of understanding miscues and their relationship to comprehension. They noted concept conception as relevant to gain insight into how concepts are developed and applied during the reading process.

The linguistic and conceptual schema reveals how the reader builds control of language and what he/she brings to the task. Mistakes in retelling are conceptually based and not mere confusions. What are the relationships of the elements and how does the reader use concepts in the active process of reading comprehension.

The use of intonation in reading reveals understanding of morphemes and their grammatical use even if the reader pronounces a nonsense word during reading aloud. If syntactic sense is maintained then cohesion and coherence dominates the comprehension experience.

The Goodmans state the significance of miscuing impacts our understanding of what the reader understands, and we must consider the interrelationship of the miscues and the cues on target to know what the reader has cognitively achieved.

Developmentally, children invent schema while writing language. In schema we can see the structure of related knowledge, ideas, emotions, and actions that have been internalized. We can examine the questions a reader develops from various kinds of schema as linguistic or conceptual. Overarching schemata reveals and a new schema modifies old schemata. (This is what we are doing during our graduate study so that our comprehension of effective ways to execute our educator role with students sheds ineffective ways and the students receive a substantially better education.)

Finally, schema-driven miscues is one that results from using existing schema to comprehend. Editing one’s schema through the process of learning would eventually eliminate at least those particular miscues related to old ways of thinking.