MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414195375 · doi:10.3138/uhr-2024-0021

The Rising (Street) Generation: The Vancouver Runaway Revolution and 1970s’ Child Saving

2025· article· en· W4414195375 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Tamara Myers, Georgia Twiss

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban History Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsLibrary and Archives CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgency (philosophy)Work (physics)Youth studiesSocial reformYouth workSocial assistancePositive Youth Development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article delves into the birth, evolution, and significance of runaways as a publicly defined social problem, and its relationship to the transformation of youth work in 1960s and 70s Vancouver. Using media reports and municipal records, we illuminate how running away and transient youth culture helped produce a new era of social reform around “saving” young people. Like their child saving antecedents that emphasized the protection of minors, reform organizations and personnel constructed a new public child—this time a teenager—and advocated for children’s rights. New reform gestures like the runaway house called Cool Aid and the detached youth workers agency called the Gastown Team exemplify the youth advocacy orientation of this modern child rescue moment. By the late 1970s, however, the era of advocacy and its programs seemed to have failed at resolving the problem as more and more young people ended up on the streets. Like its 19th century child saving antecedent, this era of youth advocacy ultimately upheld youth dependency, deferred to coercion, and insisted on policing teens over expanding on their rights.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban History ReviewSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207