Conclusion

Participants identified one theme that connected all three areas of discussion to the experience of the conference overall: the role of power relationships in shaping the future of the field. Discussions with participants explored many different kinds of questions that related to the relative power inequities between people and institutions, including media industries, state and federal government, health institutions, K-12 schools, universities, scholars, teachers, students and individuals in the community.

A number of issues arose that related to important questions about who and how decision-making occurs, whose definitions of effectiveness are valued, and what kinds of evidence are used in evaluating and funding program initiatives. In addition, participants explored the strategies that shape adoption and implementation decisions for curriculum (e.g., in the school district or health organization); the power dynamic within the classroom, between student and teacher; the relative power of different influences on the learner (peers, mass media, teacher, health professional, parents); and the empowerment of learners through the process of media literacy.

Financial issues represent yet another form of power dynamic at work. Media literacy materials can be costly, both for use by the teacher in their own training, and those designed for use by students in the classroom. Teachers' own learning represents an out-of-pocket expense for them; how many more teachers might be interested in learning learning media literacy if they did not have to pay for it themselves? Opportunities for federal and state funding must be examined in terms of the role of government in leading