MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7042622250

Preventing Youth Homelessness in the Canadian Education System: Young People Speak Out

2020· report· en· W7042622250 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2020
Typereport
Langueen
Domaine
Thématique
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésWorryPrecarityYouth studiesPositive Youth DevelopmentPublic healthPublic policyMental healthAffect (linguistics)
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In Canada, we have primarily responded to youth homelessness reactively rather than proactively. We provide emergency supports to young people once they are already on the streets, missing many opportunities to intervene beforehand. Research also tells us that many public systems (e.g., child welfare, education, criminal justice) contribute to young people’s risk of homelessness. While youth homelessness is often framed as the responsibility of the youth homelessness sector, the truth is that many public systems affect the housing status of young people. Youth who struggle in the education system, have interactions with the law, or are unable to get their healthcare needs met are more likely to experience homelessness. Likewise, housing precarity makes it difficult to find employment, make progress in school, or build supportive social networks. Youth who worry about where they will sleep or if they will be abused each night are less likely to succeed in or benefit from systems that are neither designed for, nor acknowledge, their circumstances. It is time to transform our public systems to improve outcomes for all youth and reduce the risk of homelessness for any young person.
\n
\nThis discussion paper is part of a series focused on the important roles that public systems can play in preventing youth homelessness in Canada. The foundation of this paper is What Would it Take? Youth Across Canada Speak Out on Youth Homelessness Prevention, a study conducted by the Canadian Observatory on Homelessness and A Way Home Canada. As part of this study, over 100 youth with lived experience of homelessness were consulted on how to prevent youth homelessness in Canada. Across 12 communities and 7 provinces and territories, youth told us that public systems should be the engine of youth homelessness prevention in Canada.
\n
\nThis discussion paper also builds on previous work conceptualizing prevention, including specifically A New Direction: A Framework for Homelessness Prevention and Coming of Age: Reimagining the Response to Youth Homelessness. This paper also builds on The Roadmap for the Prevention of Youth Homelessness, which provides a definition of youth homelessness
\nprevention, a prevention typology, and a common language for policy and practice in this area. The Roadmap provides a guide for how to implement youth homelessness prevention across the country and beyond, centred on research evidence and the voices of young experts who have experienced homelessness.
\n
\nThis series aims to amplify the voices and wisdom of these young people in order to drive public systems change. Through these discussion papers, professionals and policy makers across public systems will be provided with concrete recommendations for how they can participate in youth homelessness prevention.
\n
\nIn the context of COVID-19, public systems will be critical to assessing and meeting young peoples’ needs. As the Canadian education system adapts to the pandemic, schools have the opportunity to play an enhanced role in the lives of youth and families who are homeless, precariously housed and/or at-risk of homelessness. Schools need to be adequately resourced and supported by the broader community of services to do this work. This discussion paper outlines some key avenues for action, grounded in the voices of young people themselves.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Communication savante, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,845
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0050,008
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0020,006
Science ouverte0,0040,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,023
Tête enseignante GPT0,189
Écart entre enseignants0,166 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations3
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueYork University Digital Library (York University)Travaux en français237 207