Here’s a nice summary of the case from a KGW8 news report. The story aired yesterday on Channel 8. The link is to their web version. Kudos to Anne Yaeger at KGW who did a heck of a job putting together a substantive story so quickly. Interestingly, the students interviewed are eager about their prospects. But it’s not clear whether they realize their repayment obligations and what their likely future wages are yet, as they haven’t yet gotten out into the field.
In the story, the school continues to claim that it sells entry level training. Their ads don’t really say that, though if you look carefully through their recent catalogues, you’ll find that disclaimer. But the entry level training argument is a problem.
The problem is that they don’t tell students that their training provides no meaningful advantage in getting an entry level job in the trade. Those are jobs that are available to people who have no culinary training. And of course, when you get an entry level job off the street, you don’t have high interest debts of $40,000 or more.
What’s missing here is that higher education is supposed to be about opportunities. When students take on massive debt to pursue a college or technical degree, shouldn’t they be able to trust that the school is giving them a straight story?
P.S.-If you attended Western Culinary Institute on or after March of 2006 and you want more information about the case, feel free to contact us using the links on this web page. I can’t respond to questions about the case in our comments section.