We, all too often and unwittingly confuse the central aim of recovery from the stall, with the process. The first aim must be to unstall the wing(s), nothing else.
Applying power will not unstall the wing(s). The rudder will not unstall the wings. In my view it doesn’t matter whether you move the hand control forward centrally or not, what really matters is that you stop holding back.
The aircraft cannot stall on its own; it takes the pilot to do it. So if stalled the pilot must be pulling the control aft. The inherent pitch down moment will be so strong the pilot needs only to relax the back pressure; the aircraft will do the rest. The angle of bank, if any, is irrelevant and should the aircraft be turning, so what.
After unstalling the aircraft and regaining control, then and only then does achieving the minimum height loss becomes paramount. Applying power and levelling the wings is a major part of this of course. Incidentally, with regard to the Harvard an old mentor would regularly refer to how quickly, during stall recovery, you could put a Harvard on its back with too much power if also applied too early.
However, having applied power then control of pitch, roll and yaw will be required with the simultaneous use of all three controls. During the olden days when the CAA had a flight examiner wing an internal argument raged; some saying “the simultaneous use of power and pitch ...” for recovery but this would send others into a state of apoplexy whilst banging the table and demanding hysterically that you must say “pitch and then power...”. The late great Hector Taylor when asked for his view replied: “the simultaneous use of pipowtcher...” was how he said it. He explained that it was the only way he had found to say pitch and power at the same time.