"The system is broken": using arts-based methods to explore youth voices and experiences of youth justice involvement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the high numbers of youth in judicial custody in Manitoba and the staggering overrepresentation of Indigenous youth with criminal justice involvement, there remains a distinct gap in research and policy development around the centering of youth voices and experiences. In fact, youth who experience marginalization at multiple intersections of identity are more likely to be or become justice involved and less likely to have their experiences and perspectives heard. Existing research indicates that Indigenous youth in Manitoba have a long history of experiencing targeted/racialized policing, police violence, carceral/institutional violence and discrimination at every juncture of the judicial process. This historic and ongoing violence is rooted in colonization, systemic racism and structural oppression. Grounded in intersectionality, anti-oppressive practice theory, and Indigenous research methodologies, this project aimed to respond to the above reality using talking circles and arts-based methods, namely the creation of a collaborative, youth-led zine, centering youth voices and experiences. The zine includes personal stories, art, poetry and photos, and was distributed in print and as a free online document to youth-serving organizations across Winnipeg and Manitoba, becoming a community-driven resource for potential transformation and empowerment. Overall, this project highlighted the need for community-based, community-driven research, particularly within systems and institutions that exercise tremendous control over the lives of marginalized youth. Based on youth perspectives and experiences shared in the talking circle and zine, several recommendations relating to youth justice-involvement are proposed, and a few key implications for social work practice are discussed.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".