Thomson was the first of very few researchers to have studied oral reading errors as a means of addressing the question: Are dyslexic readers different to other readers? Using the Neale Analysis of Reading Ability and Goodman's taxonomy of oral reading errors, Thomson concluded that dyslexic readers are different, but he found that they do not resemble beginning readers. Thomson's study and his use of miscue analysis is re-evaluated, both in relation to the educational and political climate of the time which was hostile to the concept of dyslexia and in the light of research and social developments since then. The study of oral reading still has value today, both for the teacher and the researcher, provided its limitations as a technique are fully appreciated.