It has been reported that some schools have been using card games and poker hands to teach problem solving in mathematics classes. The idea is that children have to use their analytical skills to be able to understand the hand rankings and predict what hands will beat the others. The more realistic and fun the activity; the more likely children are to learn.
But is this acceptable?
Of course, it is important that children have a high standard of mathematical ability and can reason in an analytical manner - but is using poker hands more likely to cause a problem? There is an increase in underage gambling on an annual basis and more measures put in place each year to try and combat the problem - gambling awareness has even been introduced in some countries to help protect children from potential risk.
It’s true that many children’s games are gambling based (just think of snap, old maid and marbles for instance) and some may argue that if children are interested in poker they’re going to have a go anyway. They may at home anyway, with their families. But what if that wasn’t the case and a child was introduced to poker through their education?
Is using reference to poker in classrooms going too far in an attempt to achieve realism in the classroom - especially when underage gambling is such a problem?
It’s been almost 14 years since the first gambling degrees hit higher education in the UK, but have things moved on in line with gaming industry?
The University of Salford (UK) Centre for Gambling Studies which opened its doors in 1994 offers a three year full time BA (Hons) Gambling and Leisure Management at the Salford Business School (University of Salford) which offers students travel incentives and the opportunity to learn a language. Modules also features in Psychology and Criminology, Bsc (Hons) and Business Economics, BSc (Hons), including food and beverage management, accounting, ethics, gambling operations and business studies.
The University of Hull offers a full time Electronic Gaming Systems degree and some colleges have included Advanced Diplomas in Casino Operations in their curriculum, but other than a few poker classes hitting Harvard, there seems to be little acknowledgement or interest towards gaming in education systems outside of the UK. This is particularly interesting due to the increase of gaming provision with online casino and poker companies.
Any gambling degree has links with industry professionals, and can almost guarantee a heads up in a gaming career. But does the gaming industry need people who have limited experience fresh from college? There are training establishments such as the iGaming Academy and Playtech Academy which provided specialist training in house. Is it necessary for individuals to be trained for the gambling industry or are the external training academies enough?
Does the lack of growth and interest outside of the UK mean that gambling courses are a waste of time? Or is it actually worthwhile study and the gaming world is simply being left behind?
So we all know about the UIGEA and there’s going to be mixed views on it. Although gambling has been around forever (gambling artefacts have been found which date back to around 2300 B.C in China), it still remains a bit of a taboo subject in many cultures and countries, including the USA.
Despite this, the US reportedly makes a turnover in excess of $60 billion a year, and so it’s no wonder that they would want to restrict where American citizens can play. The online gambling market opens up the globe with its huge number of online casino and poker operators, and revenues of this size don’t want to be lost. The UIGEA has continued to cause a stir since it came into effect in October 2006. Lawsuits have been filed and lengthy court battles fought, but still the situation continues.
One side of the argument is that that the restrictions assist with problem gambling - but just because there are restrictions on where the bets can be placed, it doesn’t guarantee that there’s any limits on the amount that can be bet in the accepted casinos. In addition, most followers of the gambling ban would argue that the revenue filters back into the country’s economy, helping to stabilise it. However, if you follow current events in America it is real estate and banking that is affecting the economy. Land based casinos are showing consistently stable turnover, but the fact that online gaming is banned has not had any obvious effect on the economic situation.
Those who oppose the gambling ban state that it is an unnecessary form of control that takes away a citizen’s right to choose. The common view is that gambling bans are merely concerned with a monopoly over taxable expenditure, and if there was no money involved there addicted gambling wouldn’t even come into the equation. So what are the implications?
Unsurprisingly enough, rather than being frowned upon, many other countries are starting to follow America’s lead. Just take a look at recent events in Germany and the Netherlands, and it becomes apparent that we could have an epidemic on our hands.
But is it right that governments should be able to impose such restrictions over is citizens? Is it right that we can have the world at our fingertips, only to be told we can’t use it?
