Microsoft Word 2007 ichrie conference Proceedings Final-Final 06-06-07. doc

 
2007 Annual International CHRIE Conference & Exposition 
126
The respondents deemed all of the facilities characteristics, except for number of demonstration kitchens, to 
be important quality indicators. This finding corresponds to the areas traditionally evaluated in regional accreditation 
processes, as well as the ACFAC accreditation standards that emphasize laboratory sanitation and appropriate 
number of students per station in kitchen laboratories (ACF, 2005). It also coincides with Casado’s (1991) research 
showing that educators, industry representatives, and students all ranked physical resources as the most important 
quality factor for hospitality programs. Like low student to faculty ratios, having the proper amount of students per 
kitchen laboratory or station could facilitate more interaction with faculty and peers, and thus increase learning and 
satisfaction. 
Under organization and administration, culinary educators and chefs recognized regional and national 
accreditation as important in assuring at least minimum standards of educational quality. However, ACF 
accreditation did not achieve an overall mean importance of 4.0 or higher. This result was surprising given that all of 
the industry chefs and the majority of educators surveyed were members of the Federation. In particular, the culinary 
educators assigned ACFAC accreditation a lower mean importance score than did industry chefs.
The single largest significant difference between culinary educators and industry chefs was their rating for 
the program having an external advisory board. Educators gave this characteristic a mean importance score of 4.33, 
while industry chefs gave it a score of 3.72. Educators rely on these boards to fulfill accreditation requirements, to 
keep the curriculum relevant, to maintain their awareness of industry standards and trends, and to facilitate 
donations of scholarships, product, and equipment. The results indicate that educators must do a better job of 
explaining the role of advisory boards to industry chefs and providing incentives to increase their involvement with 
the schools.
It was interesting to find that the mean importance rating of percentage of graduates employed was higher 
than the rating for percentage of students completing the degree. This corresponds to Blumin’s (1988) findings that 
93% of her respondents used percentage of graduates employed as a quality indicator versus 88% which used rate of 
retention or rate of attrition (the opposite of completion rate). The hospitality management education literature also 
recognizes placement rates as important quality indicators (Casado, 1991; Pavesic, 1984). It appears that culinary 
educators and industry chefs recognize that the primary reason students go to culinary school is to get a job and that 
the degree is a means to this end for many students.