A Moot Point

Reflections on the 2018–19 mooting season

TOM COLLINS (2L) AND MATTHEW PRIOR (2L)

UV recently ran a survey, polling students on the mooting experiences they had this academic year. The main idea was to help prospective mooters make informed decisions. However, we also sought feedback from coaches, with a view to improving the program more generally.

32 mooters and 8 coaches responded to the survey—all participants in one or more competitive moots. As a result, we do not have enough data to present well-based statistics on mooting this year. Instead, we will highlight some general trends in student responses which might be helpful for students considering mooting or coaching next year.

Every one of the respondents found that mooting was an overwhelmingly positive experience. All of them would recommend their moot to classmates. That probably echoes what you have heard in mooting information sessions, but the respondents highlighted a few reasons for that sentiment.

First, the vast majority of respondents felt like they were well-supported by their teammates and by their coaches, on the various responsibilities they had, be they researching the problem, writing a factum, or polishing speaking style.

Second, respondents felt that mooting was an excellent way to hone their written and oral advocacy skills. Many respondents were also happy to gain some insight into what a career in litigation might look like. A substantial number of the respondents had either an existing interest in litigation or a desire to find out whether they would like to pursue that line of work.

Third, a number of respondents found that mooting was a positive social experience, which provided good opportunities to bond with fellow mooters.

Although mooting, generally, was something that all but one respondent would recommend, the majority of respondents also wished that they had known how much work the moot would be. A few of the respondents put this down to the disparity between the credit value of the moot and its workload, relative to similarly credited classes. One respondent explained, “Most moots are worth 3 credits at 0.75 weight. Mine [also 3 credits] felt more like 8 credits at 1.25 weight”.

Turning now to the coaches, almost every coach who responded to the survey had a positive experience coaching, and agreed to coach because they wanted to give back to the law school community. Most coaches were satisfied with their team’s efforts during the moot.

Coaches recommended improvements to two areas of the mooting program in particular. First, coaches felt as though the paper requirement to receive credit for coaching is unreasonable considering the amount of time and effort they put into coaching. Second, coaches would appreciate more support from faculty and the Moot Court Committee. An increased study room booking allowance was one suggested improvement.

As a final note, Will Eberlee (2L) was apparently a delight to coach. We are not sure whether Eberlee found being coached as delightful. His noted dour expression during the mooting process may or may not indicate his feelings on the matter.