i'm not saying that the point of bridge isn't to have fun. it is. but i guess the thing is that they just don't have the modules to understand something like a goal and to construct a logical sequence which might achieve the goal. they just play cards -- it's not clear to me why this would be enjoyable (just playing off cards with no goal or plan), but i guess that is the wonderful blitheness of youth. i have to say that i wish i still had it, but i guess (contrary to what perhaps many people who know me would contend) i've matured over the years.
so in some sense, this is a complete waste of everyone's time and money; they're not going to turn into bridge players. but in some sense, it fits in with the theory of recursive learning. i've noticed this in math, especially with algebraic geometry -- the first time you see something, you don't get it at all. the second time you see the same thing, you kind of get it, and the third time, you understand it. this is what's happening with these kids in bridge -- this is the first time, and the only value this has is that when they see it for the second time (in high school, in college, whenever) they will have some level of priming and familiarity. they will realize that this is a legitimate concept.
it's sort of the same thing as advertising. the point of ads is not to actually convince you that the product is good (lord knows ads are not very persuasive at this); the point of ads is to imprint the brand in your mind so that when you see it in a store, you've heard of it. it's a legitimate option. for instance, when i was buying cleaning products the other day, i bought scrubbing bubbles because i had heard of scrubbing bubbles.
anyway, the point is that maybe the next time they see bridge they will play bridge because they have already heard of bridge. so maybe my role in their lives did add value after all.