Preventing Youth Homelessness in the Canadian Education System: Young People Speak Out
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.032 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".