No disrespect intended to these faculties, but not too many years ago arts and commerce represented the final refuge for would-be college entrants who couldn't get accepted into the sciences, engineering, medicine and architecture. You mightn't make law or maths but you could be sure of a place in arts or commerce.
How times have changed. Fresh research money is pouring into the science faculties, opening up extra places, but fewer students want to take on "boring" and "difficult" subjects such as physics and chemistry. Rising student demand for places in the arts subjects and anything to do with business, in contrast, has caused the CAO points requirements for these subjects to rocket ahead.
It is now "easier" from the CAO points perspective to get into chemistry or physics than arts or commerce. The 2000 first-round offers for NUI Galway, for example, have arts at 385 and commerce at 415, compared with science at 330, physics/electronics at 340 and chemistry at 340.
The crossbar for arts at UCD is set at 375 and commerce requires 445, but only 345 points are needed for science and 370 points for the discipline where Einstein made his name, theoretical physics. A similar pattern is seen right across the third-level institutions.
Does the lower points demand mean it is now easier to get through science as opposed to arts or commerce? Probably not, and pity the poor student who hops into inorganic chemistry in the hopes of an easy passage through uni. But what effect, if any, will this change have on the quality of applicants for places in the sciences?
Any notion that standards would slip on the basis of a lower points demand was quickly dismissed as nonsense in a quick poll of a number of third-level deans of research. All indicated that the fall in points for the sciences and the rise in points for arts or commerce was simply a function of the numbers game based on the strictures imposed by supply and demand.
Far more important to all of the deans, however, was the decline in the numbers of students looking for third-level places in the sciences.
"We are still getting very good-quality students," stated Prof Stuart Hampshire, associate vice-president of research and graduate studies at UL. "What is probably of concern is that there is quite a drop in the number of students going into the sciences."
Dr Conor Long, dean of research at DCU, also dismissed any notion that quality might suffer with lower points. "We haven't noted a dramatic drop in standards," he stated, nor had there been any change in the attrition rate, with students unable to stick the pace. Standards would also be maintained, he added, because they are set internationally. "The standards that the degree programmes have to adhere to are externally monitored."
Prof John Hegarty, dean of research at Trinity College, believes that third-level institutions looking for good students might have to "internationalise" their view. "I think we will need to internationalise more. The cohort of students won't be just Irish students."
This process is already happening, according to Prof Brian Harvey, vice-president of research at UCC. "We are already head-hunting abroad, especially in the two areas of IT and biotech," he stated.
When the university won funding of £20 million under Cycle 1 of the Government's Programme for Research in Third-Level Institutions it began looking for students immediately. "A recruitment drive started as soon as we had confirmation of the PRTLI funding, but part of the problem was recruitment of candidates locally."
As to the question of how to offset this and make the sciences attractive again, Prof Harvey argues for schemes such as that agreed by UCC's governing board this summer called "Tenure B". It offers industrial-style contracts to keep researchers in place and provide future job stability.
Prof Hegarty thinks that the academics themselves might have to dig deeper by finding ways to keep the science curriculum interesting for students. "These disciplines will have to think carefully about where they are going and what they are providing to students," he said.
For example, physics might include aspects of biophysics to make the subject more relevant. "I wouldn't be too worried about the future so long as they don't get stuck and static. I am not pessimistic so long as the subjects evolve."