Important aspects of flying (outside of passing the checkride) that a pilot should learn for PP.

[RussR]

Which ACS standard number requires the applicant to demonstrate a stall in a turn?

They're discussed for certain, which is what I said. But the discussion is theory that doesn't translate well to performance because it's still killing people.

Required? No. But the examiner is allowed to specify they be done in a turn (for both power on and power off), as shown by @TCABM. So if a CFI is not having the student learn to perform them in a turn, they are being clearly negligent in their instruction.

I just checked the Gleim syllabus as one example, and turning stalls are specifically trained on prior to solo.
As another example, the Sportys syllabus also trains on them, specifically saying "straight and turning".

 

[StraightnLevel]

Turning stalls are (usually, in my experience) tested on the Private checkride. The ACS allows for them and therefore CFIs should be training on them.

I was asked for a power-on stall at a 20 degree bank as part of my PPL checkride.

 

[StraightnLevel]

Most pilots/instructors are so disinclined to fly in anything that could possibly result in VFR into IMC that experiencing it in training is probably not going to be a possibility for most, either.

Two weeks ago I had an instructor cancel an IR training flight because conditions were IFR.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Required? No. But the examiner is allowed to specify they be done in a turn (for both power on and power off), as shown by @TCABM. So if a CFI is not having the student learn to perform them in a turn, they are being clearly negligent in their instruction.

For comparison, the ACS also allows the examiner to specify short field operations with an obstacle, but when that topic comes up, note how many people here adamantly state that obstacles aren’t required.

 

[RussR]

Two weeks ago I had an instructor cancel an IR training flight because conditions were IFR.

I can't immediately condemn that instructor, it depends very much on where you are in the training program and the actual weather conditions.

I took instruments students into the clouds as much as possible, but on a sliding scale of progress vs conditions.

Once they could reasonably keep the plane straight and level, we'd get in the clouds on an MVFR day, or get a block of airspace so we can climb into the clouds. But not IMC where we'd have to fly an approach.

Once they were flying approaches, then we'd go into actual IMC where an approach would be needed to land.

Just about ready for the checkride and the weather is near minimums? Let's go.

Obviously icing and convective activity were a no-go.

 

[StraightnLevel]

I can't immediately condemn that instructor, it depends very much on where you are in the training program and the actual weather conditions.

I took instruments students into the clouds as much as possible, but on a sliding scale of progress vs conditions.

Once they could reasonably keep the plane straight and level, we'd get in the clouds on an MVFR day, or get a block of airspace so we can climb into the clouds. But not IMC where we'd have to fly an approach.

Once they were flying approaches, then we'd go into actual IMC where an approach would be needed to land.

Just about ready for the checkride and the weather is near minimums? Let's go.

Obviously icing and convective activity were a no-go.

Sure. In this case it was about low ceilings and this particular instructor's comfort level with the avionics in that plane (the Arrow I normally fly was out for maintenance).

My point was just that getting real IFR time pre-PPL isn't a given, as "real" IFR that isn't coupled with a no-go situation isn't exactly common.