Unfortunately some of this comes down to the fact that we have 250 hour pilots teaching 0 hour pilots. The only way our students will change is if our instructors change. At 250 hours I was surprised I could fly straight and level...now, I'm being facetious, but...
We used to have military pilots doing the ab-initio civilian training. These were guys with thousands of hours both in class-rooms and in-flight. These guys knew the theory like the back of their hand and were able to "dumb-down" the physics in such a way that the "dumbed-down" version was still technically correct.
However, then the student becomes the instructor and takes that "dumbed-down" version and tries to dumb it down again for their students. The cycle continues until the theory no longer matches the reality (where we stand) and the student ends up having to go searching for a theory that makes sense. Like all bad science, the incorrect lift theories sound really good (and much more technical) than our current PPL-Taught theory. The newest student then takes this drivel as gospel and runs with it, soon becoming the instructor.
What we need is a strong push for back to basics right across the board (GA and Airline). We need to fail more pilots and get the word out that there is a standard to be met. It is not on the universities to come up with a new curriculum; it is on the instructor to not recommend a student for a ride if they don't know the basics - be it a PPL, CPL or Instructor Rating.
Just because they can pass a written test that has a published question and answer bank does not mean they are ready.