In agreement with you as well Roundsounds, it should be taught and it should be taught properly. I'm lucky enough that I've had instructors whom have done things the right way with me IMHO and that involved not only recovering from a stall but spin recovery as well.
My question has come about during my training now to become a G3 Instructor, I have been asked "Is a stall an Aerobatic Maneuver?", I would have normally said No and referred back to CAR 155 as my "Legal Backup" but as this is no longer there I'm at a loss.
Purely in the name of ass covering, if I was to be an Instructor and be teaching a student some day how to recover from a stall and something went very wrong and CASA got wind, from what I can see of the Regulations at the moment (I have only recently returned to Australia so having to brush up on the tangled mess that is CASA Law again), what would stop them from deciding that me putting the Aircraft into an Intentional Stall which would obviously involve what could easily be described as an "Abrupt Change in Angle of Pitch" is not an Aerobatic Maneuver when it is clearly described as such?
As such would I not therefore be required to hold an Aerobatics Rating and also an Aerobatics Training Endorsement as well? And if not, then "Legally" why not?