Federal lawyers have mock trials ( real lawyers, real judges, fictional case taken from a real world scenario, laypersons as jury members ) .

Local courts should have mock trials so that members of the general public can 'practice' just as the lawyers do.

Why? Most judges are lawyers. If they are educating the public they are taking money out of the pockets of their fellow practitioners. They would view it akin to asking doctors and nurses to set up a fictional clinic for you to come in and practice giving diagnosis' and injections. So many of those in the legal profession view their "knowledge" of the law as God's gift to themselves and not to be freely given out.
If you've ever been to a legal clinic you begin to see how useless they are because everyone is afraid to get caught "practicing law."
Probably the best way to get mock trials going is to find young like-minded individuals in college or university towns and form a legal scholars club. Even keenly interested high school students could be a part of this endeavor. Maybe even a few in the general public might find it interesting.
There are far too many in our country who are incredibly uninformed about the basics in the law. You can see it based on how ignorant people are of the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights, which are the core underpinning of the People's Rights.

The judges rely on the lack of knowledge of persons hoping to defend themselves in life changing cases. These judges and the judges who over-see the complaints turn blind eyes because of their own involvement that is more corrupt than being complained of. Legislators are becoming justice of the Peace and imposing laws to new legislators to pass bills protecting the corruption they are involved in. The homeowners association is one example of judges working to profit themselves through default judgements for the Agent representing the Homeowners Association. Multiple cases per judge Dailey. If the public is educated they couldn't take candy away from us babies so easily.

most court cases are contractual admisterial meetings that mirror court cases and are 100% based on your consent to proceed and if jurisdiction is challenged and you stand your ground to demand proof of jurisdiction they will shut the case down... there are alot subtly to be learned but thats the basics and its not in every case.
but what you need to know is once challenged its not the judged job to prove jurisdiction its the opposite party... and i could go on for days talking about the legality's of this and every states laws constitutional law and the declaration of independence and the articles of confederation that all backs this