CALICO Software Review
CALICO Journal, Volume 21 Number 3, pp. 644-658
TileTag for Kana (Version 1.02)/ TileSet Creator for TileTag
(Version 1.0)
Yoshiko Okuyama - University of Hawaii at Hilo
Product at a glance
Product type
TileTag for Kana: Kana letter recognition game (with
pronunciation, romanization, stroke-order animation, hint,
and scoring of time and errors)
TileSet Creator for TileTag: Game authoring software
Language
TileTag for Kana: Japanese
TileSet Creator for TileTag: written symbols of any language
Level
TileTag for Kana: Beginning level, from adolescents to adults
TileSet Creator for TileTag: Instructors and student users
who are already familiar with TileTag for Kana
Activities
TileTag for Kana: Display of up to 144 kana letters in
multiple-choice format; letter (and some word) recognition;
matching kana and romaji/pronunciation versions
TileSet Creator for TileTag: Creation of new TileSets to be
added to TileTag for Kana.
Media Format
Floppy Disk
Operating System
Windows 95/98/ME
Hardware requirements
PC 386+
RAM: 8 MB
Hard Disk Space: 4 MB
Floppy Drive (required only for installation)
Sound Card & Speakers
Video 256colors; 480 x 640
Printed Documentation
User Manual, ‘Quick-Start’ Card
Price
TileTag and TileSet Creator are each priced at $14*
(individual copy) + shipping and handling ($2 within the
U.S.)
* A two-seat license can be obtained for each copy at this
price.
General Description
TileTag for Kana is a very simple, yet multifaceted, game-based program that helps meet the very
first challenges of learning written Japanese – the two phonetic scripts called kana. This involves
learning 144 kana letters (72 hiragana + 72 katakana) as well as the ones with glides (a consonant +
y + vowel combination such as kya, kyu, kyo). You can also test how many kana letters you can
remember with this program. All built-in games are generated in the format of a tile set, which
displays kana characters and romaji letters (i.e., Roman alphabet letters that transcribe the
pronunciation of kana letters) on white rectangular tiles. All you have to do is match the kana and
romaji tiles as accurately and quickly as you can.
The program is based on video-game concepts, and it surely brings in a sense of excitement and
addiction to those who try it the first time. The game can be played with 15 different tile sets, ranging
from a type of basic kana letter recognition to a more complex type (e.g., hiragana letters that
resemble the letter ‘ha’) to a word recognition type (e.g., computer-related katakana words). The last
type is, however, called ‘bonus material’ and constitutes only a small portion of the program.
TileTag for Kana is designed for students with no Japanese background as well as for those who wish
to review both kana scripts (i.e., hiragana and katakana). Although at first glance its screen layout
may resemble a workbook to software savvy users, TileTag for Kana offers more engaging practice
with the Japanese alphabet than workbook exercises can. The software not only assists your learning
with speech, animated stroke order, and hints, but also reinforces what you have yet to learn by
providing correct answers and a brief progress report immediately. Furthermore, you are in charge of
your own learning: you can readily adjust your difficulty level, decide what type of kana to work with,
and take as long as you want previewing the game contents prior to the play mode.
TileTag for Kana is accompanied by two types of print documents: the Quick Start Card and The User
Manual. The former gives simple instructions on how to install and run the software while the latter
depicts more detailed information on the procedures and program features.
No on-line help is available except for technical support on the company’s website
(http://www.bitboost.com). This site also offers free downloadable shareware that contains games
with 40 kana letters and eight words related to the days of the week. Some promotional testimonials
are also found on a website ( which posts three anonymous reviewers’ assessment of the shareware
version. Two out of three gave an overall grade of ‘thumbs-up’ and rated the stability of the program
for 5 (in a 1-5 scale with 5 as the highest). One of the two even commented that it was "addictive and
helpful." Also, a personal review of the full version can be seen where an unofficial reviewer highly
regarded the program and claimed that "focused study becomes fun" in this computer-assisted kana
letter learning.
TileTag for Kana is complemented by a separately sold authoring system, TileSet Creator for TileTag,
which allows experienced TileTag users to create their own template called a "TileSet" with any written
symbols, such as kana or kanji characters, words and phrases. The new TileSets are imported into the
existing TileTag games after their files are saved.TileSet Creator for TileTag automatically generates
an animated demonstration of the stroke order for any symbol that you draw with the mouse. This
authoring software is a perfect solution to teachers who wish to have learners of Japanese or Chinese
see the correct stroke order of characters. Technical support is available to users of TileSet Creator for
TileTagon the company’s website, too, for at least 60 days after the purchase of the product.
Evaluation
Technological features
The installation of TileTag for Kana takes only a minute. With a double-click on the program icon, it
opens right away. The operation of the program appears to be very stable: when four student users
and I pilot-tested the program, no crashes, malfunctioning features, or stalled presentations occurred.
The piloting of the program was conducted on the Windows 98 platform and was completed with no
operational problems.
In addition to the easy installation, the program demonstrates steady speed and smooth navigation
from the menu screen to the game screen and from one game to another. The only time the program
appears slow is when it sorts out the user’s mistakes and loads the subsequent trial for a replay. Yet,
it is only a matter of several seconds, and none of the student users complained about the wait time.
According to the software producer, the time lapse was deliberately inserted as a mental break for the
users.
The screen layout is very restrained: no graphics are included and colors are used minimally. The
conservative use of aesthetic effects appears to be intended to allow for faster load times and avoid
potential software crashes or conflicts. The fact that the program was originally designed for a 386
CPU would explain why it lacks the ‘bells and whistles’ of most current CD-ROM based language
software.
A drawback of such simplicity in design is that it tends to mask the software’s capabilities: the
program can display elapsed time in seconds, pronounce each character, suggest a hint, and
demonstrate animated stroke order, but none of these are immediately apparent. Student users
figured out how to play the game easily, but most failed to notice these functions, which I had to point
out to them during the piloting. With one exception, they were not aware of the time display in their
first games. First-time users would be well advised to read the Quick Start Card, or better yet,
the User Manual to be familiar with the ‘preview’ task on the menu screen and with the clickable,
multi-task, letter tiles on the game screen. Improving the user interface to make the availability of
these features more salient would certainly enhance the program.
The voice recording of a female speaker pronouncing each kana syllable is satisfactory in audio
quality. The speech is also flexible in use: it can be deactivated or replaced by a simple ‘pop’ sound
that occurs upon every successful match. The presentation of kana and romaji scripts is clear except
for three vocabulary games whose word tiles are disproportionately small: more than half the space of
the whole screen seems wasted.
The program includes no picture animations or video clips, nor does it utilize Internet resources. Such
technical simplicity was, however, favorably regarded by all the student users, and is quite reasonable
given that priority be put on the robustness of the software, rather than on the gratuitous use of
technological bells and whistles.
The authoring system, TileSet Creator, also installed easily. No knowledge of a programming language
is required to create TileSets because all the clickable buttons are already encoded with commands
such as erasing or straightening the stroke just drawn on the editing screen. The user just needs to
understand the different functions of the buttons. It takes a few trials until the first-time user becomes
familiar with the command buttons. When the full-size screen of the program is in use, the drawing of
a symbol can be done more precisely. The advanced functionality of the program, however, allows
skilled computer programmers to write their own text files in a computer script.
Activities (Procedure)
The linguistic focus of TileTag for Kana is simply on recognition skills. For the most part, the user has
to match various written symbols of Japanese with their romanized spellings. Its activities consist of
three steps: selecting a topic and play level, playing the game, and receiving feedback. If desired, the
user can keep on playing the game on different topics and levels without quitting the program.
All the tiles are shuffled from a custom data set, thus, you cannot rote-memorize their positions from
the previous games. The program records your play time and score in each game, challenges you to
retry your mistakes, and offers assistive features such as animated stroke-order and pronunciation by
a native speaker of Japanese. The program accepts group play, keeping a log on all individuals’
names, times and error counts.
Figure 1
Game Start
The first screen, the Game Start window, is where you can select a topic of the game (i.e., ‘TileSet’),
read its brief description in English, and set the level of difficulty (i.e., how many letters to be included
in your game). On the left side of the grey screen is the TileSet box, which lists 15 different topics, or
TileSets, from which to choose. A scroll box at the bottom, About the Selected TileSet, shows linguistic
information about the TileSet. (This information is also available from Help on the Main Menu during
the game.) The accentuation method is adopted from Eleanor Jorden’s textbook, Japanese: The
Written Language. The program also offers a couple of game sets, Hiragana and Katakana (JWL
schedule), tailored to the users of Jorden’s textbook. The horizontal slider on the right side of the
screen allows you to pick your own play level ranging from only one letter to the maximum (the exact
number of the maximum depends on the topic). What is more, you can preview all the game items
beforehand as you move the slider from left to right.
Figure 2
TileTag Window
The screen where you play a game is called the TileTag window. When the game screen opens, the
timer automatically starts ticking. On the screen, you can either select a kana tile by a mouse click (it
highlights the selected tile) and then click on the matching romaji or vice versa. If you are unable to
find a match for that particular letter, you can deselect the tile by simply clicking on a new one and
moving on.
The Main Menu bar of this screen allows you to adjust the game display to suit your own learning
style. For example, you can choose to hear the Japanese native speaker’s recordings (‘Speak the
Sounds’), to silence the recordings (‘No sound’), or simply to switch to the ‘pop’ sound which plays at
every successful match (‘Pop on Good Match’) in all the 11 kana letter games. However, ‘Pop on Good
Match’ is the only sound effect available for the four vocabulary type games. The goal of these ‘letter’
games is to quickly make all the tiles disappear upon correct kana-romaji matches.
Romaji tile ‘ra’
With a single left-mouse click, romaji tiles sound out the syllables in a female Japanese native
speaker’s voice. The only exception is the tile for the small tsu, which announces itself as "double-
consonant" in English. With a single right-mouse click, the romaji tiles flash a ‘hint’ (which in reality is
the answer itself-- the corresponding kana letter).
kana tile ‘ra’
With a single mouse-click, all kana tiles sound out in Japanese and flash the answer. With a double
click on the left mouse, a sleek animation of the kana stroke order appears swiftly.
kana word tile ‘RAM’
Stroke-order animation and answer flash, but not pronunciation, are available in one vocabulary-type
game, Words about computers. However, only the answer flash is available in the other three
vocabulary-type games: Counting with tsu, Days of the Month, and Days of the Week. The goal of
these ‘vocabulary’ games is to match the words and their meaning (English translations) as fast as
you can.
If you are pleased with the format of the TileTag program and wish to create games with new
characters or words on your own, you need TileSet Creator. This authoring software enables you to
create kanji character games, for instance. Using the full-screen editor, you can draw a kanji character
with the mouse first, and then type the meaning or pronunciation of the character in English on the
adjacent ‘tile text’ screen. The visual information from the editor and the textual one from the tile text
are combined and become a set of matching tiles to be played in a game. The whole procedure of
creating new TileSets can be mastered in no time. TileSet Creator’s ability to add new materials to the
existing templates makesTileTag for Kana a unique foreign language learning program.
The Authoring System, TileSet Creator for TileTag:
TileSet Creator allows instructors to create their own TileSets as a new game. This is done in three
easy steps:
o
o
o
first, select from File either a ‘stroke-based tile’ or a ‘text tile,’
then create several new items either by typing texts with the keyboard (if you chose a
‘text file’) or graphical symbols with the mouse (‘stroke-based tile’),
and finally save the new materials, which will automatically transported into the
TileSets folder.
As soon as the newly stored file is incorporated into TileTag for Kana, it is accessible from the Start-Up
window (it will show up with other file titles in alphabetical order). Another capability of the authoring
software is to allow the user to edit any of the existing TileSets to better fit the user’s learning needs.
TileSet Creator’s implementation possibilities are restricted, however. First, the authorware does not
allow for a modification across the two different tile types (i.e., text versus stroke-based). In other
words, the contents originally created in a text file cannot be converted into graphic symbols, or vice
versa. For instance, the existing romaji set of ‘the days of the week’ cannot be changed into kanji
writing. Second, it does not enable the user to import illustrations or audio recordings. Therefore,
those who wish to replace English translations with visual equivalents (e.g., a picture symbolizing a
kanji character) have to go beyond its currently available capabilities. Lastly, I found that drawing
kana symbols is rather hard with the computer mouse (however, I was more successful with kanji
characters if they have only few strokes, such as water and moon). The composition screen can be
enlarged and the most recently drawn stroke can be erased and redone with a click on a button. Yet, it
is still faster and easier to draw cursive symbols like hiragana on paper. As a language teacher, I’d
prefer making a kana or vocabulary game with index cards to using this software simply because
working with pen and paper is more efficient.
Teacher Fit (Approach)
There is no documentation on the developer’s pedagogical focus or theoretical justification for the
game-based kana instruction of TileTag for Kana. The only pedagogical guidance seems to be the
advice expressed in the User Manual: to practice Japanese, speak each character to yourself while
playing a game. However, through e-mail communication, the software producer stated that the main
purpose of TileTag for Kana is "to make it a lot easier and more enjoyable for a student to get to the
point where practice involving kana in full context will be much easier, faster, and more productive."
To observe how Japanese beginners would actually benefit from TileTag for Kana, I had four
volunteers pilot-test several kana games. One volunteer had no prior knowledge of the Japanese
language, while the other three had taken one or two semesters of Japanese in the past. Their testing
time ranged from half an hour to two hours, depending on how long they wished to practice their kana
knowledge with the software. The following observations are based not only on their user feedback but
also recent research findings in the field of second language acquisition.
One nice feature of the program is that before starting a game, the user can preview all the kana
letters together with their romanized transcripts (i.e., romaji). The romaji spellings of the kana letters
are very helpful to first-time learners of a non-alphabetic language. However, it is regrettable that no
sound is available for the preview because it only taps into the learner’s kana-romaji association. As
Scovel (1998) explains, our comprehension of linguistic input is an active engagement in which the
receiver of the incoming message attempts to use different cues such as the phonological and
orthographic forms of the input. If applied to L2 letter learning, this processing model indicates that
learners are better off with both auditory (i.e., sound of the kana letter) and visual (i.e., the letter
shape) cues. Unfortunately, there is no research on kana letter recognition to verify this point, as far
as I know. Yet, experiments of L2 ‘word recognition’ provide substantial evidence for the crucial use of
phonological cues in the learner’s processing of a non-alphabetic language (e.g., Leong, 1995;
Matsunanga 1995; Perfetti et al. 1992). Especially for the acquisition of Japanese, Koda (1992)
stresses that a well established link between orthographic decoding and phonological processing is a
prerequisite to developing strong reading skills in the language. Therefore, the lack of auditory reading
on the preview screen of TileTag for Kana is a big drawback from a pedagogical point of view.
Fortunately, voice recordings are provided during the actual games. Audio availability is the program’s
most facilitative feature because it helps the user to make a sound-symbol connection in learning the
unfamiliar orthography of the foreign language. It would have been more practical, however, if the
romaji script were optional and could be eliminated like the sound effects during the game. Without
the romaji display, those with some exposure to the kana scripts could engage in the direct
association of the syllabic kana symbol and its pronunciation per se. On the contrary, the visualspacial model that the learners construct through this non-authentic Roman-Alphabet letters, romaji,
can inadvertently interfere with their establishing strong bottom-up processing skills in decoding the
Japanese orthography (Koda, 1992, 1995). Similarly, merely assisting Japanese learning through the
use of romaji does not necessarily lead to better Japanese proficiency. In Hatasa’s (1996) comparison
of two classes, there was no significant difference in their learning outcomes --- one class with
continuing romaji assistance and the other with the relatively early switch from romaji to Japanese
orthography. Besides these implications from SLA research, many proponents of the early introduction
of written Japanese also discourage students from heavy reliance on romaji after the first few weeks
of instruction, as evident in currently popular college textbooks, Yookoso and Nakama. Given the fact
that L2 learners’ short-term memory span is restricted in language tasks (see Cook, 1996 for a
detailed discussion of memory span and L2 learning), it is helpful to have some alphabet-based input
in the very beginning. However, such assistance should be used optionally depending on the learner’s
degree of familiarity with the Japanese orthography.
In order for the program to target a wider range of Japanese beginners and assist their level-specific
needs, there should be more varied tile-format games to promote vocabulary acquisition. The only
activity of TileTag for Kana which measures up to this expectation is the one involving computerrelated katakana words ("words about computers-katakana"). The other three vocabulary games of
the program display, unfortunately, the romaji words and their English meaning and do not suffice as
good models for two reasons. First, the absence of kana presentation contradicts the title TileTag for
Kanaas well as the overall intention of the program -- i.e., instruction on kana letters. Second, as
mentioned earlier, prolonged assistance of romaji is likely to disadvantage learners of Japanese in
building strong kana letter recognition skills in the long run.
The major shortcoming of the program is that the majority of the existing activities of TileTag for
Kana only involve decontexualized character recognition. This lack of contextualized learning, and
associated absence of productive skill practice, in fact constituted the principal criticism of the pilot
student users.
Even if the program purported to provide a mixture of individualized learning and game-like
excitement, adding more contextual material can be accomplished without compromising a sense of
urgency created by the game format. One idea for contextualizing kana learning would be to include
templates in which the tiles are made of words that begin with the selected letters, and if possible,
along with some drawings. Especially for visual learners, illustration is as helpful as the spelling and
the pronunciation in memorizing how letters form a word. Katakana words used for Western foods
(e.g., piza, furaido poteto), or hiragana words that start or end with the letter ri (e.g., risu, hari, ryou)
can be presented with small drawings, for instance.
Obviously, the producer intended to focus on the very first objective in beginning-level orthographic
learning: the deciphering of the unknown symbols of a foreign language. Yet, even for this goal, wordlevel tasks and visual aids (e.g., illustrations) need to be included because they provide the user with
multiple cues associated with grapheme learning, eventually leading to the more enhanced retention
of the Japanese alphabet. As Joiner (1997) argues, the simultaneous presentation of various cues
(e.g., graphics, audio recordings, texts etc.) provides a positive impact on learning outcomes such as
strengthened memory and improved comprehension of the L2 material. Several experts (Ariew, 1991;
Ashworth, 1996; Joiner 1997; Chiquito et al., 1997) also point out that what CALL can do well is
integrating different types of L2 input in a non-linear way. In this regard, the pedagogical value
of TileTag for Kana leaves something to be desired.
As mentioned above, the pilot users regretted the program’s inability to help build their productive
knowledge of kana. One student expressed the opinion that this program was less useful as a review
to those who already know the whole kana syllabaries yet have not learned to write them all correctly.
Another stated that she remembers best when she actually draws the shape of each letter. L2
research on word learning also supports the view that one’s receptive knowledge of new words can be
greatly enhanced through productive practice (Schmitt and McCarthy, 1997). No doubt, the program
falls short of such productive practice owing to a 386 CPU heritage, which is incapable of supporting
speaking or writing non-Western characters on screen.
Finally, the program’s focus on the learner’s familiarity with individual letters simplifies what it means
to acquire L2 orthographic symbols. Of course, the learning of hiragana and katakana is the first major
challenge experienced by a majority of beginning- level students whose mother tongue is alphabetic.
Yet, it is equally important for the learner to see how the letters map on to the language, in other
words, how they are used in words and sentences. Furthermore, there is another type of learning
difficulty due to exceptions to the letter-sound correspondence in Japanese. For example, many firsttime learners struggle with Japanese spelling-pronunciation inconsistency as soon as they are exposed
to the hiragana script (e.g., the word ‘English’ is spelled with kana letters, e, i, and go, yet
pronounced as /eego/, and ‘Please’ changes from the spelled do, u, zo to /doozo/). TileTag for
Kana could have been a great supplemental tutorial, had the program incorporated these types of
kana letter learning. The program is definitely good at helping the user to develop a visual (and
phonological if the sound is utilized) store of individual symbols. It is a nice supplement to regular
class activities at the introductory stage of kana learning.
With the separately sold authoring system, TileSet Creator for TileTag, the above-mentioned
shortcomings may also be compensated for to some extent. For example, the user can replace the
romanized vocabulary items of TileTag for Kanawith hiragana versions, using TileSet Creator’s content
modification ability. Few language programs come with such a unique potential of adaptability.
However, the authoring software does not enable the user to import pictures or to add audio
recordings. Therefore, regretfully, the fundamental approach of TileTag for Kana remains the same —
simple letter or word identification with one type of cue (i.e., either its English translation or romaji
spelling), beyond which this program has little to offer. TileSet Creator for TileTag can allow you to
increase the materials, although the pedagogical principles of the software remain the same.
Learner Fit (Design)
TileTag for Kana:
Handling user responses is what this program does best. Excellence in computer feedback is
manifested in the following three features of the program:
1.
2.
3.
The program stores errors of each individual user and generates a replay with the error items,
Users can check their play time and number of errors written on a score sheet,
At the end of the game, the program presents the total play time and score achievement in a
dialogue box (e.g., "You completed the game at difficulty level 3 in 85 seconds").
Response handling in fact was the feature most favored by the four pilot users of the program. If a
learner requests the answer to flash for a letter, the letter is automatically included in the subsequent
game, too. If frustrated at any point, however, a student may simply abandon the current game and
start a new one. The game continues until the student finally matches all the tiles without a single
error. Therefore, the more mistakes a learner makes, and more hints requested, the longer the game
will be. Because of the program’s offering unlearned material over and over, all the four pilot users
eventually gained the knowledge of Japanese orthography in varying degrees. Such persistent,
laborious individual care is what CALL does better and more readily than human instructors.
After a game is played, a message prompts the user to select a different level. The user is also given a
short progress report in a pop-up message. In this sense, the program is ‘interactive’ and well tailored
to individual work. However, the type of feedback that the program provides is not diagnostic. For
example, it is the user who determines the most appropriate level of a game to play; the program
cannot assess the user’s current knowledge of kana symbols. Also, the score sheet only shows how
many errors were made. A more useful approach would be for the program to record what letters
were wrongly identified or to provide answers to the mismatches, as human teachers do.
Another strong point of this software lies in its learner control and individualized instruction. Users
can choose which script (hiragana or katakana) to focus on, how many letters to work on, and switch
to a new game whenever they want. In addition, the program allows more than one person to play the
game so it can be used as a group task (e.g., two or three students playing in competition for the
highest score). This possible application for collaborative work is another advantage of TileTag for
Kana.
Despite its strong points, the program has several minor design flaws. To begin with, the classification
of some hiragana letters is questionable. For example, not all letters in the ‘hiragana like HA’ resemble
the letter, ha
: I don’t see how the letter mo
teaching experience, distinguishing between re
or ho
and ma
looks similar to ha
andwa
, ni
. Moreover, from my
and ta
,
causes confusion in first-semester students, as well.
In the vocabulary type games, the words cache and spec may not be easily identified by people
without a strong technology background (not even in their native tongue) compared to the other items
used in Words About Computers.
Kana letter selection in the program is in the rigid kana syllabary order (i.e., a-i-u-e-o, ka-ki-ku-ke-ko
...). The program’s flexibility would be enhanced if the user could pick any column of the syllabary
(e.g., the ra-ri-ru-re-ro).
One last point, one word is misspelled on the Game Start window (it is ‘diphthong,’ not ‘dipthong’).
However, no typos are noticed regarding the Japanese letters and words used in the program. The
program is well done in terms of linguistic accuracy and is good at letter recognition drills. Yet,
because of its discrete-task orientation and simple layout, it is best suited to adult learners with strong
self-study motivation.
The main usefulness of TileTag for Kana is individualized instruction on a linear, item-by-item
decoding of kana script. The program works best when the user needs to remember a great deal of
unfamiliar-looking kana or kanji characters within a short time period. That is exactly what the
producer intended for the program. However, no matter how creatively TileTag for Kana is adapted in
a curriculum, the learner will not experience anything more than decontextualized letter or word
recognition, except for a bit of adrenaline from playing the games.
Summary
TileTag for Kana is not your typical multimedia language software, nor does it pretend to be. It comes
on a traditional floppy disk and lacks the ‘bells and whistles’ of most CD-ROM based language
software. TileTag for Kana assists kana letter learning with sound, stroke order, replay of errors as
well as feedback. It has more than what a traditional workbook, self-made flash cards, or a kana
syllabary poster can offer. The game is fun and the user has good control over what to play. The
product is sold at a very affordable price, and its sample version can be downloaded from the
company’s website for free. Generally speaking, this easy-to-use software makes what would
otherwise be lonely, tedious kana learning more interactive and engaging. With a separately
purchased authoring program, TileSet Creator, the contents ofTileTag for Kana can be modified
according to the user’s needs for kana and vocabulary practice.
Scaled rating (1 low - 5 high)
Implementation possibilities: 3
Pedagogical features: 3
Linguistic accuracy: 4
Use of computer capabilities: 2.5
Ease of use: 5
Overall evaluation: 3
Value for money: 3 (for TileTag for Kana), 3.5 (for TileSet Creator)
Producer Details
Developer/Distributor
BitBoost Systems
421 E. Drachman, Tucson AZ 85705, USA
Phone: (520) 623-6326
FAX: (520) 622-3137
Email: [email protected]
WWW: http://www.bitboost.com
Reviewer Information
Yoshiko Okuyama is Assistant Professor in Japanese and Linguistics at the University of Hawaii at Hilo.
She currently teaches introductory linguistics, psycholinguistics and first-year Japanese language
courses. Her area of expertise is second language acquisition, and her current research topics are
distance learning education, Japanese orthographic learning, and L2 native-nonnative interaction. Her
dissertation was on computer-assisted Japanese learning, which was completed at the University of
Arizona in 2000. She is a recent recipient of the Frances Davis Award for Excellence in Undergraduate
Teaching from the University of Hawaii System.
Reviewer Contact
Dr. Yoshiko Okuyama
Department of Languages
Humanities Division
The University of Hawaii at Hilo
200 W. Kawili St.
Hilo, HI 96720
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (808) 933-0717
WWW: http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/~lang/okuyama.html
Student Contributors
My appreciation goes to four anonymous student users, who pilot-tested the software and shared their
constructive feedback with me.
References:
Ashworth, D. (1996). Hypermedia and CALL. In M. Pennington (ed.), The Power of CALL (pp.79-94).
Houston, TX: Athelstan.
Ariew, R. (1991). Effective strategies for implementing language training technologies. Applied
Language Learning, 2 (2), 31-44.
Chiquito, A. B., Meskill, C., & Renjilian-Burgy, J. (1997). Multiple, mixed, malleable media. In M. D.
Bush, & R. M. Terry (eds.), Technology-Enhanced Language Learning (pp. 47-76). Lincolnwood,
Illinois: National Textbook Company.
Cook, V. (1996). Second language Learning and Language Teaching. Oxford, New York: Oxford
University Press.
Joiner, E. (1997). Teaching listening: how technology can help. In M. D. Bush, & R. M. Terry
(eds.) Technology-Enhanced Language Learning (pp.77-120). Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook
Company.
Koda, K. (1992). The effects of lower-level processing skills on FL reading performance: Implications
for instruction. The Modern Language Journal 76 (4), 502-512.
Koda, K. (1995). Cognitive consequences of L1 and L2 orthographies. In I. Taylor & R. O. David
(eds.), Scripts and Literacy: Reading and Learning to Read Alphabets, Syllabaries and Characters (pp.
311-326). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Leong, C. K. (1995). Orthographic and psycholinguistic considerations in developing literacy in
Chinese. In I. Taylor & R. O. David (eds.), Scripts and Literacy: Reading and Learning to Read
Alphabets, Syllabaries and Characters (pp. 163-183).
Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Matsunanga, S. (1995). The Role of Phonological Coding in Reading Kanji: A Research Report and
Some Pedagogical Implications. Technical Report #6. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii at Manoa.
Perfetti, C. A., Zhang, S., & Berent, I. (1992). Reading in English and Chinese: Evidence for a
"universal" phonological principle. In R. Frost & L. Katz (eds.), Orthography, Phonology, Morphology,
and Meaning (pp.227-249). Elsevier Science Publishers.
Schmitt, N. & McCarthy, M. (1997). Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition and Pedagogy. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Scovel, T. (1998). Psycholinguistics. (Oxford introductions to language study series). Oxford, NY:
Oxford University Press.