In response to: Cook C. How about a little love for non-thrust manipulation? [1]

I’d like to thank James Dunning, Anita Gross, Charlie Goldsmith, Toby Hall, Ken Olson, Valerie Phelps, Philip Sizer Jr, and Jean-Michel Brismée, for contributing their invited responses to my recent editorial titled ‘How about a little love for non-thrust manipulation’. I invited these individuals b...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Hall, Toby
Format: Journal Article
Published: 2012
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/37814
_version_ 1848755151138979840
author Hall, Toby
author_facet Hall, Toby
author_sort Hall, Toby
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description I’d like to thank James Dunning, Anita Gross, Charlie Goldsmith, Toby Hall, Ken Olson, Valerie Phelps, Philip Sizer Jr, and Jean-Michel Brismée, for contributing their invited responses to my recent editorial titled ‘How about a little love for non-thrust manipulation’. I invited these individuals because I appreciate their contributions toward policy, evidence, and teaching, and desired to fully represent multiple viewpoints. As you can see by the responses, thoughts regarding the continued debate of thrust versus non-thrust are as polarizing as ever, and based on these responses, one can see that one answer does not fully cover all the questions on this issue.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T08:51:44Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-37814
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T08:51:44Z
publishDate 2012
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-378142018-03-29T09:06:49Z In response to: Cook C. How about a little love for non-thrust manipulation? [1] Hall, Toby I’d like to thank James Dunning, Anita Gross, Charlie Goldsmith, Toby Hall, Ken Olson, Valerie Phelps, Philip Sizer Jr, and Jean-Michel Brismée, for contributing their invited responses to my recent editorial titled ‘How about a little love for non-thrust manipulation’. I invited these individuals because I appreciate their contributions toward policy, evidence, and teaching, and desired to fully represent multiple viewpoints. As you can see by the responses, thoughts regarding the continued debate of thrust versus non-thrust are as polarizing as ever, and based on these responses, one can see that one answer does not fully cover all the questions on this issue. 2012 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/37814 10.1179/1066981712Z.00000000013 restricted
spellingShingle Hall, Toby
In response to: Cook C. How about a little love for non-thrust manipulation? [1]
title In response to: Cook C. How about a little love for non-thrust manipulation? [1]
title_full In response to: Cook C. How about a little love for non-thrust manipulation? [1]
title_fullStr In response to: Cook C. How about a little love for non-thrust manipulation? [1]
title_full_unstemmed In response to: Cook C. How about a little love for non-thrust manipulation? [1]
title_short In response to: Cook C. How about a little love for non-thrust manipulation? [1]
title_sort in response to: cook c. how about a little love for non-thrust manipulation? [1]
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/37814