I'm not a TRI but one observation I made is that the high level stall is a pig. In our sim we needed to lower the pitch to perhaps 5 degrees nose down and then be extremely gentle in the recovery in order to prevent further stall - adding thrust progressively as we started to raise the nose. It was a surprisingly tricky exercise
Having never flown even an Airbus simulator I cannot make comment. But I noticed that the landing configuration approach to stall mentioned earlier was done at well above circuit altitude and with only partial flap extended.
Unless there is a technical reason not to, I would have thought that an approach to stall and recovery would be more realistic and demanding of greater skill if conducted below 1000 ft on final approach - the Turkish Airlines 737 accident at Amsterdam comes to mind.
Regarding the high altitude case, in the 737 at 37,000 you need to count on allowing at least a deliberate 3000 ft height loss before levelling at a safe speed. That safe speed is approximated by Vref 40 plus 100 knots which will be around 230 knots IAS. In other words an entirely different technique when faced with a landing configuration stall at 1000 ft on final approach where minimum height loss is essential.