Yes. I've just looked at two randomlyish chosen Computer Science courses (UEA and Nottingham Trent) and the content is not exactly impressive. I'd say it's about a year on average behind my degree (from the early 1980s) and UEA is I think one of our better universities.
Three other factors:
First, does this include just Computer Science, does it include things like Computer Games Programming degrees (my advice for anyone doing one of these ; don't ; learn to program generally and study maths). Does it include ICT (no-one cares much) ? Does it include "Digital Media" ? I seem often have to point out that HTML is *not* programming. It's a XML (ish) page description language. How much time is spent on waffly cr*p ?
Secondly, I don't think I exist any more (psychologists dream ....).
From about 1977-8 ish to the early 1990s there was a huge boom in coding skills learnt on everything from machine code trainers through to and ending with (pretty much) the Amiga and Atari ST. Lots of people bedroom coded. I don't think they do any more. Yes, a lot of it was fairly ropey BASIC ROM systems like the Spectrum and C64, but there was a huge skill base there that could be redirected into better practices fairly easily. I went to Essex on interview and the chap asked me if I wrote programs, I said I did, he said, what was the last thing you wrote , I said it was a Pascal compiler (in BASIC !) and we then had a discussion about the how I'd done it. Perhaps that's a bit extreme, but I'd be impressed if someone actually wrote something almost properly (e.g. not clicking on wizards, or semi automated drag and drop). The older machines also had the advantage that it was easier to hit the metal, you knew how things actually worked.
Third. My son is 18 and is doing a BTEC Level 3 IT course, which the college he is attending has made as computer-science-ish as possible.
Several things to note. Firstly my son (almost) always does the work himself (he occasionally asks me for advice), hands it in on time, and tries to do it to the best of his ability (usually very well). He doesn't seem to be that common. Many do not. They are often hand-held walked through it if they don't hand stuff in ; I've seen lecturers sit down with students on a "do this" "now do this" "now click this" basis ; this attitude is common in schools (and universities in many cases I'm told). The reason for this is staff are set pass rate targets. Or they hand in something half done and its sent back with large detail on how to make it "right".
The actual content isn't as impressive as it looks on paper. A lot of the students (as A/C says) aren't up to it, so it becomes a fill in the blanks job. It will say something like "create a stock control system" but nothing that you or I would recognise as such.
For example my son was given about 20-30 lines of Javascript to type in to do some HTML page validation, but there was little actual explanation of what it was - I went through it with him so he actually understood what he was doing, rather than just typed it in.
This is known (I think) as scaffolding in education, rather than have a question like "Describe the different fate of Henry VIII wives" and having to write a 30 minute essay off the top of your head, you get a fill in the blanks, which a monkey could do. Each part is preceded by an instruction which basically tells students what to write. So what comes out is a series of identical (nearly) essays all which have the prescribed content.
This sort of thing can be applied to Computing (it also applies to Maths) so you are actually hand walked through the production of something that gets the marks.
The problem is that you can't actually do it independently. So A/C get someone with all the paperwork, then gives him some easy starter work and there's no guidelines, he's got to work it out for himself (they're mostly he's), and they can't.