No, it was because the figured they were losing more in spin training
than they were in accidental spins.
In the late fifties, I think.

Seems like I read that somewhere. Stick and Rudder? Probably some
other places too.

Most other countries around the world have dropped them for the private
and commercial by now as well. Most still require them for instructors.

Some recent AOPA pub or maybe Aviation Safety had an article in which
it was claimed some instructors were getting by with mere awareness --
ie an endorsement from some other instructor after a what amounted to
a demonstration of knowledge, not demonstration of practice.

I've never soloed anyone who hasn't had some introduction to them.
Usually.I just demonstrated them, the idea to get the mystique out of
the way, and then, if they were of a mind to try them themselves, I'd
let them try one or two. Then I'd show them how to avoid them and the
bulk of the lesson would be centered on how they develop and how to
recover from an incipient spin.

We did that before I soloed too, and if I had asked, I might have
received.

Nonetheless, the reality that I did not have to demonstrate recovery
means there is that "dragon at the edge of the earth" out there. A
great image, by the way. It will remain everytime I practice stalls
until I go get some dual training and do a couple of recoveries (that
will be soon).

It might not be a big deal, but at least an endorsement from the
instructor: "This student has recovered from an incipient spin".

It sounds like you've done that with some of your students anyway. I
say that's a good idea. Why doesn't the FAA say that's a good idea,
too?

The spins themselves are no big deal and there's not a lot to be learned
from doing precise three turn spins for a private pilot.

I'm not arguing for that.

An introduction
to show what the dragon at the edge of the earth looks like, and then
repeated and varied demos on how they develop and how to recognise one
before it even starts is the most productive way to approach instruction
in spins. Towards the end of their training, we would revisit the spin.
Few achieved what you would call dazzling proficiency in them, but they
went away better defended against an accidental spin.

I think this is the right track, but as I note above, since you're
spinning anyway (thus taking on the risk the FAA is saying they want
to aviod) -- make the student recover. At least once. How about twice?
Go higher if the extra altitude is needed for safety. As you say, no
big deal. Yet it looms in the mind of the student and the PPL. I
haven't met a whole lot of people that say they feel comfortable with
stalls, let alone spins. But if they've recovered from a spin, then
the stall shouldn't bother them anymore.

Don't even talk about being upside down.

We're flying. You have to have some cajones.