Group items tagged

use it erroneously equates "primary object of a conspiracy" with the subjective ultimate goals of the conspirators. On the contrary, a close reading of Zamora makes clear that the term "primary object" has a somewhat technical rather than ordinary meaning; it refers to the substantive offense which the conspirators agree to commit. (Ibid.)

Thus, in order to determine when the three conspiracies terminated, the court looked to the time when the substantive offense underlying each conspiracy was completed. (Id., at p. 554, fn. 12.) The court found that the central object of the conspiracy to commit grand theft was the 390*390 obtaining of insurance proceeds under false pretenses; hence, such conspiracy terminated upon the receipt of the last payment. (Id., at pp. 555, 560.)

In Williams v. Superior Court, supra, 81 Cal. App.3d at pages 344, 345, the companion case to the one currently before us, we held that concealment is a continuing crime if the facts demonstrate a continuing pattern of purposeful concealment.

are

A reading of People v. Gilbert (1938) 26 Cal. App.2d 1, 25-26 [78 P.2d 770], convinces us that this contention lacks merit. In that case, immunity was granted to two of the persons who had allegedly participated in three conspiracies. The remaining defendants argued that the persons granted immunity could not be counted as coconspirators for purposes of determining whether a conspiracy had been committed. (8) The

As in Gilbert, the grant of immunity to Ms. Hoover is not inconsistent with her culpability as a coconspirator. Her acts in furtherance of the conspiracy may therefore be considered in establishing the culpability of her fellow coconspirators. (See, also, People v. Hadden (1947) 79 Cal. App.2d 635 [180 P.2d 3

The court there said that when the facts are susceptible to opposing inferences, whether "a party has notice of 'circumstances sufficient to put a prudent man upon inquiry as to a particular fact,' and whether 'by prosecuting such inquiry, he might have learned such fact' (Civ. Code, 19), are themselves questions of fact to be determined by the jury or the trial court." (See, also, West v. Great Western Power Co., 36 Cal.App.2d

As many may have seen before, there are 10 steps of pedagogical usage of Moodle, which is outlined on Moodle Docs. It details the typical 10 step progression which looks like: Putting up the handouts (Resources, SCORM) Providing a passive Forum (unfacilitated) Using Quizzes and Assignments (less management) Using the Wiki, Glossary and Database tools (interactive content) Facilitate discussions in Forums, asking questions, guiding Combining activities into sequences, where results feed later activities Introduce external activities and games (internet resources) Using the Survey module to study and reflect on course activity Using peer-review modules like Workshop, giving students more control over grading and even structuring the course in some ways Conducting active research on oneself, sharing ideas in a community of peers

A lot of people want that secure private place in the LMS with big gates, with students needing to gain competencies and knowledge.  Many people really want this “Content Pump” focus, becuase it is what they need. Others use it as a community of practitioners, connected activities, content created by students and teachers alike and many methods of assessment. These are the two ends of the spectrum of usage.

Moodle has two roles: to be progressive and integrate with things coming up, and a drag and drop UI, with innovate workflows and improve media handling and mobile platforms to be conservative and improve  security and usability and assessment , accredition, detailed management tracking and reports and performance and stability

Since Moodle 1.9 came out three years ago,  March 2008 and most are still using the three year old code which has had fixes applied since then (1.9.11 is the current release.) The support for 1.9 will continue until the middle of 2012 as it is understood that it will be a big move to Moodle2.   “If you are going to Moodle2, you may as well go to Moodle 2.1 as it is better with 6 months more work” .

However, the ongoing support for each release will be 1 yr moving to the future. Moodle will be released every 6 months which enables the organisations to plan their upgrade times ahead of time.

What will be in Moodle 2.1? Performance Restore 1.9 backups Quiz/question refactor Page course format Interface polishing Official Mobile app (there now is a Mobile division)

HQ are working on an official app which uses Moodle 2 built-in web services. This provides a secure access to the data in Moodle 2 for people who have accounts in Moodle which greatly benefits mobile apps.

Moodle HQ has looked at what is Mobile really good at and identified them one by one and implemented them.  This includes messaging, list of participants in your course, marking attendence (in class roll call). This will be for the iPhone first and then someone will make it for Android so it will lag behind, but will be the same.

What is going to happen in 2.2 and beyond?

Grading and Rubrics Competency Tracking (from activity level, course level, outside courses to generate a competency profile) Assignment (planning to combine all 4 into one type and simplify it) Forum (big upgrade probably based on OU Forum) Survey (to include feedback/questionnaire – being rewritten currently) Lesson Scorm 2 Improved reporting IMS LTI IMS CC (although it is in 1.9 needs to be redone)