"I know of one instructor who was asked to start to spin a Puchacz at
800
feet above the ground as part of his annual instructor check. There is
no
room for error if you are deliberately initiating a full spin at such
a
low level."

Wouldn't it be better to initiate the practice spin at 3,000 feet,
then check the altitude at the bottom of the recovery? I am very
confident in my ability to recognize and recover from a spin, but I
would NEVER, NEVER, NEVER enter one intentionally at 800 feet AGL, if
for no other reason than spinning in the pattern would be frowned on
at most airports I frequent. Nor would I put my life into someone
else's hands quite so readily. From 800 feet there is very little
opportunity to take control and sort out a recovery gone awry.

The most surprising aspect of the Puchacz discussion to date is the
number of accidents involving instructors. This led me to believe that
perhaps there was something amiss with the aircraft (which may be the
case). But clearly there are training practices in place in Britain
that should be scrutinized. Frankly, if a CFI asked me to spin from
800 agl, I'd consider it a test of my judgment, the only appropriate
response being, "Let's land and take another tow."

I've always thought the Brits pretty sensible. Is this a form of
hazing among the fraternity of BGA flight instructors? It is very
difficult to justify such extreme measures for the sake of
proficiency. (Will he keep his head on straight when the ground is
rushing madly at him? And if he doesn't, then what?) Or is it a
vestige left over from a time when aircraft design was less regulated
and spin entries were common? Or both?

You've heard of social Darwinism? Perhaps this is organizational
Royalism: training philosophies shaped by too many generations of
inbreeding....

I have to say, from outside looking in, it's just a little
frightening.