For 17 years, Worlds of Flavor in Napa Valley has been considered by the industry to be America’s most influential professional forum on world cuisines, food cultures and flavor trends. This year’s event didn’t disappoint.

The trend to Asian tastes and techniques has been growing exponentially in the United States for years. It never came together with such enthusiasm and promise as it did at the 17^th Worlds of Flavor® International Conference and Festival, held in April on the Greystone campus of The Culinary Institute of America in Napa Valley in front of an audience of more than 700 culinary, foodservice and hospitality professionals.

“The vastly varied cuisines of Asia are deeply rooted in traditions that have evolved over millennia,” said Greg Drescher, vice president of strategic initiatives and industry leadership at the CIA. “Today, American chefs are embracing and experimenting with what once was considered exotic. These foods and flavors are poised to continue their ascendance and become ever-bigger players in our national dining scene, whether it is in small independent restaurants, high-volume operations, food trucks or university cafés.”

According to Mintel research, more than half of U.S. consumers think organic labeling is simply an excuse to charge more, and more than a third regard “organic” as a marketing term with no real value or definition.

Organics would seem tailor-made for shoppers seeking foods and beverages that are healthier for them, their families and the planet, but new research from Mintel reveals that Americans appear confused about the benefits of organics, with many perceiving the organic label as nothing more than an excuse to sell products at a premium.

Overall, the biggest selling point for organics is the perception that the products are healthier (72%)—much more so than any environmental or ethical reason. In fact, only 29% of consumers recognize that organic products are highly regulated, and 51% agree that labeling something as organic is an excuse to charge more. While sales of organic products are on the rise, actual consumer penetration has plateaued.

Organics Are Healthy, Right?
Overall, 72% of U.S. consumers purchase organic food and/or beverages for health or nutrition reasons, while slightly fewer (69%) factor environmental or ethical reasons in their purchase decision.

When looking specifically at female shoppers, this consumer group appears to choose products that avoid certain characteristics: 43% purchase them because they do not contain unnecessary ingredients or chemicals, and the same percentage do so to avoid food made with pesticides.

An understanding of “putting in place” is one of the most important skills for culinary students to learn and practice in becoming professionals. Says Dr. Mayo, proper mise en place is actually composed of three parts—all of which do double duty in the kitchen and dining room.

By Dr. Fred Mayo, CHE, CHT

In the last “Mayo’s Clinic,” we completed a three-part series on using out-of-class learning experiences such as interviewing, structured observation and shadowing. This month, we will talk about a core issue in culinary education: mise en place.

Mise en place—literally, the phrase in French means “putting in place”—has become a personal and professional discipline for chefs. It structures the way they work in kitchens and, for many of them, how they organize and structure their lives. There are even articles such as “For A More Ordered Life, Organize Like A Chef”published in the NPR blog, “The Salt,” that point out how useful the discipline can be in life.

As we teach our students to learn and practice mise en place, it might be useful to remember the three dimensionsof mise en place: physical, intellectual and emotional.

Physical Mise en Place
One of the primary foundation skills we teach new culinary students involves the practice and importance of organizing their stations in a kitchen before they start to prepare food. It is a matter of both arranging the equipment and the ingredients since both are critical to successful cooking.

Telling people to be the best they can be allows them to quit striving whenever they want. To be the best in your field, however, one must always strive for the next level. This is the generations-long American Dream that we, as teachers, offer our students.

By Adam Weiner, CFSE

I would like to dedicate this article to my two mentors and instructors for my California Teaching Credential: Susan Clark and the recently passed Lee Clark.

In this article I would like to revisit two previously published articles.

The first article is “Assessing Culinary Math Skills,” September 2011. This article has received more than 3,500 hits, and is one of the most popular articles that I have written. It is a culinary-math assessment test that I believe should be utilized by all instructors within the first week of a student starting your class.

Sadly, I have noticed that in the four years since I first wrote this assessment, scores are dropping. Today, I had a new student ask me how to triple the first ingredient in a recipe. The first ingredient was “one cup of water.”

What can the graduate do for the school? Says Chef Sorgule, the proper question should be, What can the school do for the graduate?

By Paul Sorgule, MS, AAC

Considering the ongoing questions about the value of a degree and the ever-changing landscape of the food business, I am constantly giving thought to how administrators of culinary programs can increase the perceived and real value of an education in food.

Everyone is certainly aware of the pressure pertaining to value being passed on to institutions from accrediting bodies, especially those preparing students for technical trades. The answer moving forward might very well be in shifting how we look at a degree.

For far too long, earning a college education was a two- or four-year process that students went through in pursuit of a degree. In other words, students passed through the college experience, incurring significant debt, with closure coming on graduation day.

The connections that continue to exist between the college and the graduate are limited to alumni newsletters, reunions and gift requests from the Institutional Advancement Office. We might invite an occasional graduate back to speak to a class or provide a demonstration, but, for the most part, the theme is: “What can the graduate do for the school, rather than what can the school do for the graduate.”