After finishing the offers for the current cycle, we start to review the statistics to prepare material for the next (2016) cycle, including an update to the “probabilities table” like the one shown in a previous post and in our applicant information. We have compiled the preliminary results from the 2015 cycle and these are shown below, where “Probability” is the percent of applicants with an admission average in the given grade range who received an offer to their first choice program. These are raw admission averages, without any other bonus or factors. The results show some surprising changes from what we have seen in the past and expected.

The Biomedical results were not unexpected, given the number of applicants (over 900) and limited number of spaces (about 50). But the Software (SE) applicant pool was unexpectedly stronger than before, partly due to a small increase in applicant numbers, but the number of people with strong grades seemed to increase too. The result for 2015 was that the Biomed and SE programs were extremely competitive, moving into a class all their own. Having 95+% admission average was still not a sure thing, and obviously a lot of applicants with 90 to 95% were disappointed.

Other programs were similar to last year with a few variations. Nanotechnology was a bit easier to get an offer for, as many of their likely applicants seemed to go for Biomedical instead. Mechatronics was somewhat easier too, due to the increase in the number of available spaces over the past two years. Electrical and Computer Engineering were a bit more competitive, as some strong applicants to Software had these as second choices when they didn’t get their first choice.

So these are the results we will likely publish in our 2016 materials, but as we saw this year “past performance is no guarantee of future results”. But it’s about the best estimate we can make to help future applicants make realistic choices and manage expectations.