I have a strong interest in this subject at the moment because I am just about to return to uni after many long years away to do undergraduate study in a a field which is very different to my background in science and engineering.

A couple of things have stood out from the application process: first, the eagerness to acquire mature-aged students is palpable. Could that imply a tacit recognition that school-leavers are poorly prepared for higher education?

Second, the admissions process, while ostensibly selective, has many loopholes that allow entry to those who don't meet the criteria, especially mature applicants. Even competency based training, of which I have done far too much in my career and is essentially a box-ticking exercise for the "trainer" (nobody fails) is a possible qualifying pathway.

This doesn't bode well for the standard of education that can be delivered and I am apprehensive that I will be paying good money to watch people being given remedial education to bring them up to a minimal standard that is still far below what I would regard as reasonable at tertiary level, at least in first year.

In the course I have chosen, which is a three year degree, the first year has only 3 subjects for a total of 10 contact hours and the course handbook recommendation is that students take no more than 2 in the first semester!

When I studied science, first year had 4 subjects in each semester and required about 20 lecture hours plus another 6 in pracs. High level understanding of maths, english and scientific empiricism, as well as basic scientific general knowledge was assumed and it was up to students to keep up. I didn't do so after second year, being naturally lazy and preferring the idea of making money to sitting in a lecture theatre. That was my choice, but I still respect the commitment and application needed to acquire the genuine skills and deep understanding of the subject that such a course of study imparts.

I was truly gobsmacked to see how much things have changed.