This paper begins from the assumption that "knowledge specialisation and differentiation" will continue to increase, and that these features of contemporary STEM knowledge will increasingly pose questions which science and engineering education must address. Two typical responses are outlined. The first response, the default position, has come to be known as "traditionalism," a minimal response that attempts to shore up a high-selectivity, low curriculum change elite template by means of repair services, which is where Academic Development in the universities began. The second response, a "progressive" one reacting to traditionalism, strove to put the learner and the act of learning in the spotlight, inadvertently thereby foregrounding skills and backgrounding the knowledge to be taught and learnt. The paper goes on to discuss de-differentiating features of this second response and argues that this will over time undermine the capacity of the university to deal effectively with rapidly evolving specialisation and differentiation. The paper concludes by considering a third way to address the issue.