"... In PAGE 5: ... A wide survey is given by Humphrey [8]. Table6 shows the results of the survey about the motivation factors of the team members. The Pearson correlation between these replies and replies concerning the motivation of the respondents themselves is from 0,79 to 1,0 excluding the questions of possibility for initiative and independence (0,61) and responsibility (0,67) showing that it is acceptable to use only one set of motivation factor weights in the calculations.... ..."

"... In PAGE 6: ...e p o s i t o r i e s D o c u - m e n t s V e r s i o n s K n o w l e d g e b a s e M a t e r i a l s u p p o r t S u b j e c t d e f i n i t i o n R e q u i r e m e n t s a n a l y s i s I m p l e m e n - t a t i o n D e s i g n E v a l u a t i o n t e c h n i c a l r e p o r t w r i t i n g D e c i s i o n s a n d k n o w l e d g e r e g i s t e r T o o l s B i b l i o g r a p h i c a l r e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e m a n a g e m e n t P r o c e s s Q u a l i t y a n d m a n a g e m e n t a c t i v i t i e s R e p o s i t o - r i e s a n d t o o l s C A S E , c o m p i l e r T a s k s , s c h e d u l e m a n a g e m e n t V e r s i o n s c o n t r o l K n o w l e d g e m a n a g e m e n t D o c u m e n t a t i o n V e r s i o n s c o n t r o l R e v i e w R i s k s , t a s k s a n d s c h e d u l e m a n a g e m e n t Figure 1: General view of the model for academic software project development tried to cover all software life cycle, as suggested in R2 from Table1 . It was necessary to define the architecture (according to R1, in Table 1) that we used in the process specification.... In PAGE 6: ...e p o s i t o r i e s D o c u - m e n t s V e r s i o n s K n o w l e d g e b a s e M a t e r i a l s u p p o r t S u b j e c t d e f i n i t i o n R e q u i r e m e n t s a n a l y s i s I m p l e m e n - t a t i o n D e s i g n E v a l u a t i o n t e c h n i c a l r e p o r t w r i t i n g D e c i s i o n s a n d k n o w l e d g e r e g i s t e r T o o l s B i b l i o g r a p h i c a l r e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e m a n a g e m e n t P r o c e s s Q u a l i t y a n d m a n a g e m e n t a c t i v i t i e s R e p o s i t o - r i e s a n d t o o l s C A S E , c o m p i l e r T a s k s , s c h e d u l e m a n a g e m e n t V e r s i o n s c o n t r o l K n o w l e d g e m a n a g e m e n t D o c u m e n t a t i o n V e r s i o n s c o n t r o l R e v i e w R i s k s , t a s k s a n d s c h e d u l e m a n a g e m e n t Figure 1: General view of the model for academic software project development tried to cover all software life cycle, as suggested in R2 from Table 1. It was necessary to define the architecture (according to R1, in Table1 ) that we used in the process specification. Such architecture includes, for each work definition, the objective and activities workflow.... In PAGE 6: ... Software quality elements are related to versions control, tests planning and execution and project monitoring. To select software quality activities we regarded CMMI level 2 process areas [34] (R3 from Table1 ). The same architecture used to describe software process elements was used to describe software quality elements.... In PAGE 6: ... Repositories and tools are important to support the model. Four repositories are necessary: documents repository, to store documents or artifacts whose versions are not controlled; versions repository, to store versioned documents and artifacts; design rationale repository, to store addi- tional information (for example, decisions) of projects and support material repository, to store didactical material useful to students (R4 from Table1 ). Tools are related especially to CASEs, versions control and design rationale systems.... ..."

"... In PAGE 5: ... Table 3: Perceived value of eClass features Rating Features of eClass Very Useful + Useful (%) Posting course documents 87 Posting assignments 78 Posting announcements 72 Communication via email 58 Posting external links 47 Posting student information 43 Communication via discussion board 27 Viewing usage statistics 27 Using gradebook 25 Using course calendar 23 Creating and facilitating groups 22 Tracking document downloads 19 Using address book 17 Administering exams/quizzes 12 Surveying students 12 Using eClass resource Centre 9 Communication via virtual chat 8 5. Instructors motivations for using a VLE Respondents saw improvements in pedagogical practices (such as increasing communication among students or helping students learn about online media) and in work efficiency (such as in saving time, as among the main motivations for using eClass, as shown in Table4 ). 74% felt ease of use is a major motivator, which also helps to save time and investment in learning to use the software.... ..."

"... In PAGE 12: ...ndicated their anticipated career choice was non-formal education (e.g., agribusiness salesperson, youth development educator) and 7% (N = 2) were undecided. Regarding career motives, 42% (N = 10) of the preservice agricultural education teachers whose anticipated career choice was formal education ranked the three extrinsic motives highest among the six career choice motives provided ( Table1 ). These 10 preservice teachers had the lowest possible rankings for intrinsic motives (i.... ..."

"... In PAGE 8: ... A subject may cite ore than one factor. The resulting factor ranks n Table6 ) are quite different from the ranks in able 5.... ..."

"... In PAGE 22: ... For instance, Method A might be optimal with x theories, but once it tries to incorporate (x + 1) theories, the effectiveness may start to decrease. In Table2 , the analysis that is based on this assumption is presented. Table 2 is a ma- trix of software engineering educational approaches, and the learning theories that they leverage.... In PAGE 28: ...6 Projects Plus Realism (All Others) The rest of the Projects plus Realism approaches presented in Section 2.1 leverage the same set of learning theories, therefore they are all placed at the end of Table2 . Because the goal of a project in general is to teach students how to perform tasks using the knowl- edge they are taught, all approaches that involve a project are essentially Learning by Do- ing approaches.... In PAGE 31: ... This makes logical sense: If we want to better prepare students for the real world, it is only common sense that we try to introduce the real world to them sooner rather than later. However, if we look again at Table2 , we can see that the majority of these approaches only employ two learning theories: Learning by Doing and Situated Learning. Table 3: Frequency and Breakdown of Each Software Engineering Educational Approach.... ..."