What will lead to meaningful change in legal education? And what should be the direction(s) of change? In the United States, as elsewhere, law schools are caught between critics who want them to be more responsive to the changing legal market and the needs of private employers, and critics who want them to do more to resist and shape the private market and promote the public good. These critiques are not wholly incompatible as a blueprint for curricular reform. Increasing students’ exposure to new skills and technologies, experiential training and projects, and collaboration with other professions, provides ‘opportunities for critical analysis and reflection’ as well as making students more employable.