Although I am very new to this forum and to eGullet, the topic of culinary degrees is nothing new to me. Here are my observations on the subject, based on my experience in the hopitatlity industry for last little while: Cooking is a trade, period. There is no national standard for cooking. There is national criteria for other trades such as plumbers, electricians, gas fitters, etc, but not for cooks. There are many schools that provide the training for cooks Each school has it's own curriculum, text books, and methods. Some schools pump out graduates in as little as 4 mths, some as long as 2 or even 3 years. There is no standard to adhere to or to follow. I take issue with the schools who claim that their graduates are "Chefs". They are not. They are graduates of cooking schools. A "Chef", imho, is a manager, one that hires, fires, trains, sources, book-keeps, and genuflects before the Boss, F&B , GM, Resident Mngr, or whomever. A "Chef" MUST be a competant cook in order to supervise, train, and demand from his/her staff. There are no national standards for what a Chef must be responsible for. Cooking is only one aspect--a given, just like it's a given that we can all read and write. The Chef must be able to book keep, have the basics of H.R., know the local labour codes, the local Worker's comp. codes, the health codes, the building codes, and above all, be resourcefull. There is no standards for a "Cook". It seems to me that "Cook" in N. America is a dirty word, something to be ashamed of. "Chef" sounds better and has been substituted for cook, ( and even turned into a verb too...) and this causes a lot of confusion. Thus, The employer has no tools to guage an applicant on his/her resume. A "degreee" can only suggest that the applicant is serious about his/her career, but that is all. Never the less, it is a criteria that does seperate the wheat from the chaff. Not a very good tool, but a tool none the less. Unions.. Let's not go there... s