Ranking S1 Reguler Programmes Under Score Uncertainty
Bima has a SIMAK UI score of 612. He must rank two S1 Reguler programmes. Last year's indicative cutoffs were: Computer Science 640, Information Systems 590, and Mathematics 570. Each programme has 60 seats; Computer Science received about 1,800 first-choice applicants, Information Systems 700, and Mathematics 400. Bima's subscores are Mathematics 85, Physics 55, English 80, and Reasoning 70. He is eligible for a tuition scholarship only if he ranks in the top 10% of his cohort in semester 1; without it, his family can pay for Information Systems or Mathematics but not Computer Science. He prefers Computer Science but would accept Information Systems. The form requires a first choice and a second choice; if he is not admitted to either, he may appeal but cannot re-rank. He cannot retake SIMAK.
1. Recommend how Bima should rank his two programme choices. Justify the ranking with the cutoff, applicant, and seat data.
Read the worked answer
Rank Information Systems first and Mathematics second. Computer Science's indicative cutoff of 640 is 28 points above Bima's 612, and the applicant-to-seat ratio is about 30:1 (1,800 first-choice applicants for 60 seats). His Physics subscore of 55 is also weak for a computing programme that may weight mathematics and physics. The probability of admission to Computer Science is low, and using the first slot on it is costly because second-choice seats may be filled only after first-choice applicants are considered. Information Systems has a cutoff 22 points below his score and a 700:60 ratio, so it is competitive but plausible. Mathematics is the safer second choice at 570. Because the form does not allow re-ranking, the first choice should maximise expected value, not prestige. Computer Science first would be a high-variance gamble that risks losing the acceptable programme.
2. How should the scholarship condition affect the ranking, and what uncertainty remains?
Read the worked answer
The scholarship requires top 10% of the cohort, which is easier in a less competitive cohort and where Bima's strongest subscore, Mathematics 85, is directly relevant. Mathematics likely gives the highest scholarship probability, Information Systems moderate, Computer Science low. But scholarship probability should not override admission probability: an offer he cannot afford is not useful. Ranking Information Systems first and Mathematics second balances fit and affordability, while keeping a realistic scholarship path. Remaining uncertainty includes the actual cutoff in the current year, whether second-choice applicants are considered equally, and whether the scholarship quota is programme-specific. Bima should confirm the second-choice policy in writing before submitting; if second-choice applicants are treated equally, a Computer Science first choice becomes less risky, but the 28-point gap still makes it a poor first choice.