Every home on the market today is constructed with a plethora of different materials. Consider for example a floor heating system. Underfloor heating is extremely popular as it allows for more freedom in the decoration of a room and can be more energy efficient than traditional heating.

There are many systems available on the market but they all have something in common – they need a solid foundation to build on. For the majority of systems, that foundation or subfloor is concrete.

What is important to note is that whatever means a homeowner chooses to use, it is important that they choose only quality materials. In fact, we can translate the analogy to the legal sector in that whatever system a lawyer or attorney is using, they need to ensure the quality of their argument is above question.

But how do lawyers ensure the “quality” of their arguments? One way is to practice. In the court system, there are a couple of different forms of mock practice. You have the moot court and you have the mock trial.

It’s easy to think of these two terms as interchangeable but on closer examination, they are not. In fact, in many law schools around the country, students are required to participate in one or the other to hone their skills in preparation for the courtroom, after all, real life is not as flexible as a simulation.

Before students get into the courtroom, they need to learn how to practice effective advocacy. This is where moot courts and mock trials come in. A moot court program offers law students an interactive opportunity to hone their oral advocacy skills in a simulated appellate advocacy environment. Law students can participate in local or national competitions and gain first-hand experience in this process.

An example of a simulated competition would be an event hosted by the New York Bar Association, where participating teams are assigned hypothetical cases that have been constructed and written by eminent practitioners and scholars of the bench and bar. These teams then make competing arguments in support of various motions that have been filed in the case.

Teams are evaluated on the quality of their oral advocacy skills as well as their mastery of the legal issues presented in the case material, there is also a focus on the practicality of the argument presented.

So what are mock trials? A mock trial simulates a real court trial and each of the roles, including witnesses, jurors, and a judge are played by law students. Each team is paired with another team on a civil or criminal case. Each team takes on a role, either as the plaintiff or defendant. The roles are specified, along with the factual circumstances of the case.

The jury (which is made up of their fellow students) listens to both sides and renders a verdict based on what they have just seen and heard. What is actually judged is the performance of the students – both the lawyers and the witnesses – on the prosecution side and defense side.

It is an entirely student-run endeavor. While faculty does offer input on the process, teams organize and oversee their own trial preparations. They even conduct mock trials amongst themselves to work out any kinks in their setup before they approach a unique team.

This can be likened, in a sense, to testing out a bathroom or a floor heating system. If it works, it works and is satisfying for the user, but there is still a chance, although a very small one, that it doesn’t. The difference then, however, is that in work/practice there is a level of intimidation and pressure that there often isn’t in school competitions. Nevertheless, they are both equally important to ensure that the argument presented is in stone, just like a quality floor heating system or quality bathroom that works without issue.

Moot court vs mock trials can be a valuable learning tool. Through practice and competitive events, participants get the chance to fine-tune their persuasion and oral presentation skills. By means of training, law students develop belief in their own abilities and intellectual potential while also gaining a deeper understanding of the law.

Both methods of practice help to reinforce the confidence that a degree brings to practice, akin to having a bathroom or bathroom feature that you know works.

That’s why practice makes perfect, and that’s why it is so important to have done it before in some capacity. It builds confidence, and confidence can lead to success.

There are many aspects of running a mock trial or moot court which reflect daily practice at a law firm, making it all the more reason that law students should participate in as many of these events as they can. To get experience, you need to learn and apply the scenarios given, this grants a greater understanding of legal topics that reflect real world situations.

The main takeaway of the moot court vs mock trial debate is that the lawyer needs to be able to assume a role. In both instances, the attorney needs to be able to determine the facts, organize their ideas, and present them to an audience. These skills are absolutely essential in constructing a successful argument.

It’s about recognizing that whatever the system of practice may be, the better the practice, the better the output. Quality in practice, like quality in home construction, leads to guaranteed success.