1 of 2
2 of 2
(Editor's Note: This is the third installment of Jenny Agnew's series on the culinary industry. The first two segments were published in Relish here and here.)
If you’ve read about for-profit schools like The University of Phoenix lately, you probably know something about the growing controversy surrounding such institutions. For-profit culinary schools, which are often referred to as “factories,” are plagued by the same issues. Part of the problem has to do with accreditation (how it was acquired, and, with online classes in particular, where the accreditation originates) and another part stems from funding. According to Andrew Leonard, writing for Salon, “around 70-80 percent of for-profit revenues are generated by federal student loans.” Moreover, a larger number of students who attended for-profit schools default on loans compared to their not-for-profit-graduated peers. In the last few years, for-profit culinary schools have come under investigation for misleading potential students and the public alike regarding graduation and job-placement rates.
In his Lucky Peach article, Wilson summarizes some of the controversy surrounding for-profit culinary schools, many of which are owned by two Fortune-1000 companies: Career Education Corporation, which owns the Le Cordon Bleu schools in the US, and Education Management Corporation, which owns the Art Institutes. “For these corporations, culinary schools are a gateway into federal aid dollars,” Wilson writes, illustrating how culinary for-profits in particular remain lucrative cash flows for their parent companies.
As Kris Janik discussed his experience at Le Cordon Bleu in Portland, he recalled that another Portland culinary school, the Western Culinary Institute, was on the radar for promising students non-existent jobs upon graduation. Several years later, in 2009, a class-action lawsuit was filed against the school by students claiming they couldn’t find the jobs promised them. Another class-action lawsuit filed in 2007 against the California Cooking Academy, owned by Career Education Corporation, settled last year for $40 million, with the corporation claiming no wrongdoing. Chronicle of Higher Education reporter Kelly Fields explains of the suit: “The college reported [job-placement] rates between 75 and 96 percent for its culinary-arts and baking programs, but didn't disclose that a majority of graduates were working not as chefs, as they had been promised, but as prep and line cooks—minimum-wage jobs they could have obtained without a degree.” While these students will receive up to $20,000 in refunds should the judge approve the settlement, according to SF Weekly writer, Matt Smith, “The reality is that regulatory tweaks and lawsuit nips won't do much to alter an industry that receives $20 billion in annual revenue, most of it in the form of federal grants and loans, and then spends much of it on deceptive marketing, as well as on campaign donations and lobbying to ensure minimal regulation and a continued flow of government funds.”
What’s a potential culinary student to do? The CIA’s web site offers one solution: go there because it’s not-for-profit. Since the school “directs the financial resources it receives right back into its education mission,” as stated on the site, its students purportedly reap the benefits of those resources and a transparent admissions process that does not rely on fraudulent promises. One cannot forget that near $50,000 price tag attached to the CIA, however.
Another solution, according to Ronald Holden, writing for Crosscut, is the community college, which he argues, “provide[s] a respectable, well-rounded culinary education, and not just ‘knife skills.’” Perhaps the greatest reason to attend a community college program, Holden claims, is the cost, which is often considerably less than other schools. That claim bears truth locally as was already expressed in part one of this series.
Locally, potential students will have another culinary school to choose from beginning in July when the The Art Institute of St. Louis, a for-profit, opens in St. Charles. When asked if the St. Louis area can support a fifth culinary school, David Hofmann, Campus Director, said yes. Hofmann went on to acknowledge that student debt for all students—not just those in culinary school—is at the forefront of people’s conversations, and the new school is prepared to advise students every step of the way on “having a sense of ownership in [their] education.” Moreover, Hofmann made an important distinction between job placement and job assistance: the school will help students find jobs but cannot place them in those positions. Finally, students will learn from professionals in the field that options other than owning a restaurant exist for culinary grads, ultimately giving them more avenues toward employment upon graduation.
Choosing a college or university is a decision that’s neither easy nor lightly made especially in this economy. For those in the hospitality industry, the choices prove even more difficult: seek out employment in a kitchen or go to culinary school? If school, which one? Regardless of which school one attends, the reality of beginning chefs’ low salaries means that one will be paying off loans for a long time. Betty Hallock from the LA Times, for example, reports that according to data available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, “the mean annual wage of a restaurant cook is $21,990.” Perhaps some of the scrutiny aimed at for-profit culinary schools should be turned toward the culinary industry in general and the media, which, in our current celebrity-obsessed culture, perpetuates myths about high salaries, fame, and instant success for beginning chefs.
