Third-level institutions, it is predicted, are set to change dramatically over the next few years. As the number of traditional university-bound school-leavers (i.e. predominantly middle-class 17- and 18-year-olds) coming directly into the higher education system decreases, so the numbers of non-traditional students - mature students and people from disadvantaged backgrounds, for example - is set to rise.
But how well placed are the institutions to deal with this influx? "Not very" is the answer that some third-level sources will give you. Some institutions, it is said, aren't even considering the issues involved.
On the other hand, some people are taking time out to consider the situation. Take Professor Michael Laver of TCD. His views have raised a few eyebrows recently - particularly in the business world. While diversity in the student body is welcome, he says, admitting large numbers of non-traditional students may be less easy than the Government thinks - and a good deal more costly.
He is concerned that there's too little thinking at Government level about the issues involved. And, importantly, employer attitudes will have to change, Laver says. At employment level, the business community must deal with the issues of ageism and class bias.
"It's important that before we embark on a huge programme of expansion that employers don't continue with the sort of prejudices they have in the past. I've seen mature students giving up jobs and making huge sacrifices to come back to get a degree only to find that they can't get suitable jobs afterwards. It's very disheartening.
"Employers are looking for bright 22-year-olds, rather than bright 40-year-olds, coming out of university." Similarly, he asks, can we be sure that employers won't discriminate against graduates who have "the wrong postal address? If we are to encourage large numbers of non-traditional students to come to university, I would want to see clear evidence that employers are age and background blind.
"We have to get people in third level thinking about what's going to happen when our current way of taking students changes," he says. "For example, the easiest way to admit school-leavers is through the CAO, but it's not that easy to use it for other groups of people.
"The CAO is in effect a computer-dating system - it matches your Leaving Cert results to your university preferences. There's no thought in it and nobody saying `this would be a good university for that person'."
Non-traditional entrants, however, present greater admission difficulties. "How do you admit large numbers of mature students, who don't have the Leaving Cert?" asks Laver, who holds the title of "senior lecturer" at TCD, but stresses that he is speaking in a personal capacity. "At the moment the numbers coming in are small and they are admitted on the basis of interviews and essays. How do you expand that system to admit more people, who don't have Leaving Cert?
"The universities face the sort of choices faced by the CAO, but it's harder. Do we apply standardised procedures and aptitude tests? But is that fair? Are we recreating a miniCAO, with people swotting for tests? "If we introduced a large-scale interview programme, how could we ensure it would be fair and objective and that we wouldn't have TDs contacting us lobbying for places for constituents? As soon as you exercise discretion, you open yourself up to pressure."
Once relatively large numbers of mature students are admitted, they present the universities with a new set of issues. "What do we do with them once they're here? It's clear that we will need a lot more money. School-leavers are relatively cheap to educate - for example, they make few demands for childcare. Most people of 30 to 40 years of age have families, responsibilities and commitments that school leavers don't have. What would we do about childcare facilities if we had a massive increase in mature students? The Government would have to provide us with a lot more resources."
People who have been out of the education system for any length of time have particular difficulties, Laver argues. "It's not just a matter of sitting them in lecture halls. They need extra help in the early years to get back into study. You lose your study skills after 10 or 15 years in the workplace.
"There is a number of issues concerning re-entry into the education system that have to be dealt with. People who have been working in jobs which require little writing find it more difficult to adjust than do civil servants, say, who are writing all day."
Students from disadvantaged backgrounds are also going to need more supports, Laver argues. "TCD's experience with pilot programmes for disadvantaged students shows that the staff-student ratio has to be very different to that which pertains in the college as a whole. At the moment we're dealing with very small numbers, but if you take them into a foundation course you can't stick them into a lecture with 200 students."
The Irish university staff-student ratio is dismal enough at the best of times, he asserts, citing the TCD experience. "It's about 19- or 20-to-one here. That puts us about 90th in the British pecking order, where they have ratios as low as eight- or nine-to-one. We have increased our student numbers in recent years at the Government's request, but the resources haven't been generous and the system has become more crowded."
Non-traditional students will also need extended tutorial supports throughout the system. "If we're saying that the university sector should set a target of a 5 per cent intake of students from disadvantaged backgrounds, then we will need a significant reduction in the staff-student ratio."
