A series of field tests run over a 2 year period assessed the ability of 125 special education and regular teachers (5 inservice and 1 preservice group) to detect and accurately describe basic attributes of reading miscues before and after training using the Hypothesis/Test Reading Modules. A surprising outcome was the virtual lack of spontaneous teacher mention of meaning, syntactic or auditory/visual attributes when describing/identifying miscues prior to training. Instead, teachers used only gross distinctions, such as omission, insertion, and substitution categories; and failed to describe the more detailed attributes that could provide them with indications of their students' use or disuse of major reading strategies. As expected, the correct identification of attributes associated with these Hypothesis/Test miscue distinctions significantly increase following a Hypothesis/Test Training intervention. Teachers also made gains following training in the detection of reading miscues as well as their identification of such obvious miscues as omissions and insertions, although, unlike the increases in Hypothesis/Test distinctions, test-retest effects contributed to these gains. Teachers consistently rated the Hypothesis/Test Module training program in the highest scale interval when describing its usefulness, relevance, and 10 other descriptors. The study pointed out both the need for teacher training in miscue analysis and the ease and effectiveness of the self instructional Hypothesis/Test Reading Modules in providing such training to a variety of inservice and preservice teachers. Tables with statistical data are included. (Author)