What are the advantages and disadvantages of using moots?

A moot is a vehicle for teaching and learning, and in common with all vehicles there are advantages and disadvantages to its use.

The 2006 survey for the Mooting for learning project looked at the advantages and disadvantages of mooting. Respondents were not asked to consider a pre-conceived list but instead to provide their own thoughts, which were then collated and an analysis undertaken of those most commonly cited.

Advantages

The four main advantages cited were:

1. The development of research skills (mentioned by 55% of respondents).
2. The development of communication skills (45% of respondents).
3. The development of critical thinking skills (30% of respondents).
4. The development of team working skills (20% of respondents).

It is interesting that the four most commonly cited advantages related to the development of skills, since it can be argued that mooting is much more than this (Gillespie, 2007). Another commonly cited reason was that it was ‘fun’ for the students – this could be important in the development of student motivation.

Some caution must be given to these perceived advantages. In Why mooting? we noted that a moot is often confused with a debate or presentation, and certainly some of these perceived advantages could equally apply to those activities, however it is also clear that mooting does bring something different to bear. A good example of this is in respect of research skills, a point made by Broadbent (2001). “Mooting…requires not only that students find the material, but also that they then have to read it, evaluate its usefulness and utilise it in the construction of a legal argument”.

A moot participant who, for example, simply relies on the headnote of a source or does not understand how the principles of stare decisis apply to the authorities they have identified will quickly become unstuck.

Of the four perceived advantages the one that is perhaps most interesting is team working skills. This was mentioned by 20% of respondents and is almost certainly a perception of many others, but is it accurate? In the USA it is not unusual for students to take on different roles (Ringel, 2004; Gillespie, 2007), with students working in a team of advocates and researchers, however in the UK participants are often simply advocates. A moot problem invariably has two distinct points of law, and on that basis it is quite possible (or indeed likely) that participants work individually and not in teams.

Disadvantages

The four main disadvantages cited were:

1. Staff workload (mentioned by 60% of respondents).
2. Student absence (35% of respondents).
3. Scared students (25% of respondents).
4. Consistency of marking (20% of respondents).

As with the advantages it cannot be said that many of these disadvantages are unique to mooting, however some unique challenges undoubtedly exist. It is perhaps slightly surprising that student absence was not mentioned more frequently. Given the formulaic nature of a moot, there is a real danger that the absence of a student can have significant consequences for the way the moot operates, especially where the student is playing the role of an appellant.

The fact that ‘scared students’ was mentioned is interesting. Many students consider that mooting is ‘fun’, but it can also be extremely daunting, especially when undertaken in the first year. Students are often afraid of public speaking, and while this challenge is present in other activities (including debates, presentations etc) to an extent, a moot carries with it the additional burdens of a student having to advocate, remember the etiquette and respond to direct questioning, something that is not found in many other forms of student presentation. It is for this reason that care should perhaps be taken when deciding when mooting should take place.

Last Modified: 26 July 2010