There aren't many, if any, newly manufactured trainers today that come with "standard" (dare one say classic) instrumentation.

Of course the price of the average spamcan has skyrocketed as they've gotten all the fancy avionics (a 172S goes for a quarter-mil these days!), and to pay for that extra gee-whiz the schools pass the cost through to the students. As such, the schools aren't making any extra money off fancy airplanes - they're just passing through the increased acquisition cost via a higher per-hour price.

The argument of "is that necessary?" is a valid one, but training fleets of large flight schools & universities get worn out MUCH faster from utilization than your local flight school with a early 70s Skyhawk available for rent...and when they start looking at replacement fleets these schools are faced with the offerings of the OEMs, which offer avionics (glass cockpit) that customers want.

Somebody once said "Situational awareness and positional awareness aren't the same thing", and I agree. I also agree that big displays distract new pilots from LOOKING OUTSIDE THE FREAKING AIRPLANE and that far too many pilots use technology not as the aid it was meant to be, but as a crutch for their own lack of skill & experience.

I don't agree, however, that schools using glass-cockpit airplanes for training are trying to unethically generate more income or are being irresponsible toward their students.