glider pilots (both ab initio and solo pilots undergoing continuation training) are all taught spin entry and recovery as routine. Gliders loose roughly 400 feet per turn and recovery is VERY prompt. The emphasis is on recognising situations which may lead to an accidental spin (under banked over ruddered final turn, failed winch launch, gusts in thermals) and learning the correct recovery action.
recovery from stall with wing drop is taught with NO REFERENCE to the use of rudder ie stick centrally forward, NO AILERON, regain flying speed return to the normal gliding attitude. Inexperienced pilots may stall with wing drop through poorly coordinated flying so expecting them to recover with highly coordinated flying (including the use of rudder) seems unrealistic. More experienced pilots may well choose to use toprudder to prevent further yaw and apparently prevent the dropped wing going further during recovery.
Glider pilots in thermals choose to fly with high bank angles, a high angle of attack and speeds close to the stall speed for that configuration (within 5 to 10 knots of the stall) This is because they want the highest climbing performance in thermals (excessive speeds mean bigger radius turns and poor or absent climb rates)
This is totally unlike powered flying where students are taught over in that part of the envelope lies stalling and autorotation SO DONT EVER GO THERE.
Aviation is littered with examples of simulation training causing far more problems than the real crisis ever did (practice asymmetric approaches in the canberra anyone?) So if spins are likely to happen and training to deal with it is low (not absent) risk - why not - especially as recovery from accidental spins is quite possible from fairly low heights (circuit height) in gliders. Powered flying = different story
"aux vaches"