For Law Schools & Clinical Programs

Lawyers enter the workforce knowing the law. Too few know how to try a case.

TrialSim gives law school programs the infrastructure to change that.

The preparation gap is real. And programs feel it.

What employers say

Hiring partners at litigation firms and public defender offices cite the same gap: new associates can research and write, but they freeze in the courtroom. They have not had enough reps.

What programs face

Clinical professors cannot supervise unlimited repetitions. Moot court reaches a fraction of students. The students who need the most practice get the least, because there is no infrastructure to provide it at scale.

What students experience

Most law students graduate having conducted two or three full examinations under real pressure. They know what good advocacy looks like. They have not had the reps to make it instinctive.

A performance development platform for trial lawyers — starting in law school.

The simulation

TrialSim places students in realistic courtroom scenarios — voir dire, direct examination, cross-examination, objections, opening statements, closing arguments — and responds dynamically to their performance. Witnesses have psychology, not scripts. A hostile witness who senses weakness presses it.

The coaching

After every session, TrialSim surfaces the three most consequential moments in the performance — not just errors, but strong instincts and missed opportunities. It names what it saw, offers an alternative, and sets one specific focus for next time. Not a scorecard. A coaching conversation.

The measurement

Every session is scored across eight dimensions of trial performance — the PRESENCE rubric. Scores accumulate over time, producing a trajectory that shows not just where a student is but how fast they are developing.

The institutional layer

For programs, TrialSim provides a faculty dashboard showing cohort-level performance data: which skills have the widest gaps, which students are developing fastest, which students have not engaged. Data that turns anecdotal feedback into evidence-based instruction.

What gets measured — and why it matters

The PRESENCE rubric was built from the competencies that experienced trial attorneys and clinical educators identify as the difference between adequate advocacy and exceptional advocacy.

P — Preparation

Command of the facts, the law, and the strategy before the first word is spoken.

R — Responsiveness

The ability to listen, adapt, and respond to what is actually happening rather than what was planned.

E — Execution

Technical proficiency in the mechanics of examination, objection, and argument.

S — Style

The voice, presence, and authority that make a jury or judge want to listen.

E — Emotional Intelligence

Reading the room — witness, jury, judge — and adjusting in real time.

N — Narrative Control

Keeping the story coherent under pressure, across every phase of trial.

C — Courtroom Awareness

Understanding the procedural and spatial dynamics of the courtroom as a performance environment.

E — Edge

The competitive instinct that presses an advantage, recovers from a setback, and never loses the thread.

Each dimension is scored independently, producing a profile — not a single number — that shows exactly where a student is developing and exactly where they need work.

How programs use TrialSim

01

As a clinical preparation tool

Before a student makes their first appearance in a live clinic matter, they complete a structured sequence of TrialSim sessions calibrated to their practice area. The professor reviews their PRESENCE trajectory before the first supervision session. The conversation starts with data instead of starting from scratch.

02

As between-session practice infrastructure

Between supervision sessions, students practice independently. The platform tracks engagement and performance automatically. Professors see which students are putting in work and which are not — without requiring self-reporting or adding administrative overhead.

03

As mock trial competition preparation

Students preparing for mock trial, moot court, or advocacy competitions use TrialSim for deliberate repetition outside scheduled practice sessions. The coaching layer identifies specific habits to break and skills to develop — the kind of targeted feedback that usually requires one-on-one time with a coach.

The professor's time becomes more strategic. TrialSim handles the repetitions. You handle the development.

Built for the legal profession's confidentiality standards

Student performance data belongs to students.

PRESENCE scores, session history, and coaching records are owned by the student — not the institution. Faculty dashboards show cohort-level data only. Individual records require explicit student consent to share.

Case preparation materials are architecturally protected.

When advanced students upload case materials for simulation, those materials are stored in matter-specific encrypted containers inaccessible to institutional administrators. This is a technical constraint, not a policy setting.

We do not sell data. We do not train on your students' work.

TrialSim's business model is institutional licensing. Your students' performance data is never sold, never shared with third parties, and never used to train our models.

This is some text inside of a div block.

Ready to close the trial preparation gap at your school?

Every program is different. We'd rather understand yours before telling you what TrialSim can do for it. Tell us a little about your program and we'll be in touch within one business day.

No sales deck. No pressure. Just a direct conversation about whether TrialSim fits what you're trying to do.

Your name

Title and institution

Approximate student count

What's the biggest advocacy preparation challenge in your program right now?