On a forum headed "Trident's Accreditation is in Jeopardy" a lot of unsubstantiated rumor and speculation has been swirling around worrying a lot of people who might read it. The default assumption seems to be that it is likely TUI will lose its accreditation therefore questions relate to what students should do IF that happens. However, in my opinion the assumption that accreditation will be lost is unfounded. Here is my analysis of the situation. I hope this helps students, faculty, staff and administrators at TUI come to a better informed opinion about the matter. In summary my argument is that: a. The problems which led to the "show cause" letter are easily fixed. b. The consequences of not fixing them for the institution would be very adverse and therefore the institution will fix them. c. The fixes are very likely to satisfy the accreditors. That there’s a risk of loss of accreditation is true. However the critical issue is how large is the risk? There’s a risk in driving to the supermarket for milk, yet no one is suggesting that people should stop doing it. Everything we have learned about TUI tells us that the people there are doing their best to fix the issues. The university apparently had an administrative problem dealing with the transcripts of incoming students. They’re fixing that. Specific people didn’t report this to WASC when they should have. Personnel are being replaced and a new and more experienced man is running the university now. In my opinion there are in fact two risks: 1. A risk that TUI will not fix the problems of the administration of transcripts and of reporting to WASC. 2. A risk that WASC will not accept that the problems have been fixed to their satisfaction and as a result not accepting that sufficient cause has been shown that accreditation should not be revoked. Let’s analyze these in turn. My understanding is that TUI is already fixing both of the problems mentioned in the "show cause" letter, as they have indicated. They have a new President, are assessing their records to determine which students are affected and are changing their administrative systems. As they have every incentive to fix them fully, I expect that they will have fixed them by the deadline imposed by WASC, if not before. Thus I assess the risk of them failing to do so as effectively zero. There is then a risk that even though the problems have been fixed, WASC does not accept this as sufficient. The nature of the solutions for the two problems (new systems to replace failed administrative systems and new personnel to replace failed reporting systems) seem to me to be ones which it is very likely that an accrediting body would find acceptable. Again I think it reasonable to expect that TUI will determine beforehand what WASC will find acceptable and make sure it does whatever they require as not to do so would have such adverse consequences for them and for their students. This then leads me to assess the risk that WASC will not accept TUI’s fixes as minimal to zero. People on DegreeInfo.com are expressing worry and concern as to what they ought to do, whether they should go elsewhere, whether they should continue at TUI and so forth. The answer to that in my opinion is pretty obvious given that the assessment of the risk of losing accreditation is virtually nil and that is, TUI should be a potential school for any prospective student, and indeed existing students, for exactly the same reasons it was a potential school for them before this accreditation issue came along. The whole dear-me-the-sky-is-falling-what-to-do-what-to-do! argument depends on the risk of losing accreditation and frankly there is no reason for expecting that to happen. It should also be born in mind that the accreditation issue has absolutely no bearing on the quality of the educational experience at TUI. It is to do with how credits for courses completed elsewhere were recorded and a failure by specific people who were at the university to report this to WASC. So given that students might be hard pressed to find equivalent quality programs elsewhere and that there are various switching costs in going elsewhere, and if the likelihood of losing the accreditation is next to zero, it makes sense to me that students should continue to enroll there.