Research studies and academic literature on the education of ethnic minorities focus on minority groups’ low academic achievements rather than on the variability in educational performance among different groups (Luciak M., 2004). Educational failure is more easily attributed to cultural differences or cultural incompatibility, despite the fact that some minority groups whose culture and language significantly differ from the majority achieve good educational results (Ogbu, 1995, p. 190). Ogbu’s theory on the variability in educational performance among different ethnic minority groups provides helpful explanations. Not all minority members who achieve low educational results in European countries are failing in school because of primary cultural and language differences, social class factors or institutional barriers in educational settings. The study of community forces shows that a group’s instrumental, relational and symbolic beliefs about the benefit, value and meaning of schooling influence the educational strategies of its members. This Ogbu called primary and secondary cultural differences.

The paper focuses on the schooling of ethnic minorities within the Armenian context. Many European researchers attribute the low educational attainment of different ethnic groups to social class factors and underestimate the relevance of minority status. John U. Ogbu’s theory is tried to understand the variability in educational performance among different ethnic minority groups. Ogbu proposed a typology of ethnic minorities: autonomous, immigrant and caste-like minorities. The largest of the ethnoreligious minorities living in Armenia is the Yezidi community - 35,308 people (Census). From this point of view, the Yezidi community in Armenia is a mixed type of national minority: as a culture, it is an autonomous community with its beliefs, habits, language, as a social group it is immigrant type with a high level of integration. This contradiction affects socialization, the realisation of Yezidi children’s right to education. Yezidi people as a national minority are afraid to be assimilated and trying to keep their specific cultural identity don’t allow their children to go to school after 12- 13 years old. For legitimation of this serves cultural habit of ‘’girls’ rape’’.

In Armenia, 12-year secondary education is compulsory, after graduating from the basic 9th grade, the child must be admitted to the high school or continue his / her education in a vocational institution. In this regard, there are a number of educational problems in the Yezidi community of Armenia, which have an impact on socio-cultural factors and features. The prevalence of early marriages is one of the factors that contribute significantly. It is common for Yezidi girls to get married at the age of 12-13. As a rule, girls who get married at an early age are forced to leave school immediately without education.

Research questions:

• How Yezidi students/parents evaluate the quality and accessibility of school education?
• What are the main reasons for dropping out of compulsory education?
• How early marriages affect the continuing education of Yezidi girls.
• What part of the children of the Yezidi community is excluded from compulsory education?
• How did the transition to distance education during COVID-19 affect the educational inclusion of students in the Yezidi community?

The research relies on a triangulation of multiple information sources, data collection methods and analytical approaches. In order to answer research questions, the following data collection methods have been applied: Secondary analysis Desk-review and secondary analysis of legal and policy framework related to the overall education system, the legal package on educational legislation; previous studies of education reforms and previous assessments. The analysis also included statistical data of out of school children, any related studies, research and analytical reports. •Statistical Data • Previous research • Legal acts •International experience • Written, official inquiries (RA Ministry of Education and Science, regional administrations, schools, community administrations) Primary data collection Considering the comparative advantages of the mixed methods approach, the research tried to utilize quantitative data collection methods. However, inception discussions with experts and stakeholders, as well as preliminary mapping of the problem coverage and scope, revealed that large-scale primary quantitative data collection is non-relevant due to the small size of target groups. Instead, it is envisaged to use secondary sources for quantitative data and conduct secondary analysis of existing statistics. Primary data collection methods are developed to reach out Yezidi community, including the most vulnerable children, both girls and boys, and the service providers, managers and local, regional and national authorities. The method for each target group is described below: Interviews • Interviews with students, including 15 interviews out of compulsory education • Interviews with parents, including 15 out of compulsory education children • Interviews with school principals and community leaders, 9 interviews • Expert interviews with representatives of international and local organizations, researchers, 5 interviews. Group discussions Focus group discussions were held among students and parents: 4 group discussions among parents and 4 group discussions among students: 2 group discussions each for girls և boys, 2 group discussions with mothers and fathers. Sampling The sampling included communities that have a more large Yezidi population in Armenia. Data protection Data Protection is a key aspect of the fieldwork. Data protection includes measures concerning collection, access to data, communication and conservation of data. In all evidence generating activities children and, where relevant, adults, were fully informed, in the language and manner appropriate to their maturity and capacity. The children participated only after the informed written consent is granted from a guardian/caregiver/parent. The child’s personal approach and competency also were taken into account and written informed assent forms were filled in.

• Attitudes towards education have changed significantly in the Yezidi community over the last ten years. In the past, the issue of dropping out of education the community did not consider a problem, and now in the Yezidi community, dropping out of education and not attending school is considered a problem. • Education in the community has started to be used not only for having a profession, professional work, but also for acquiring life skills. • The continuation of education is affected by the level of parents' satisfaction with the quality of education, as well as the issue of professional orientation and awareness. • There are a number of problems with access to education in Yezidi communities: o Absence of kindergartens, preschools o Professional qualities of the pedagogical staff, including discriminatory treatment of Yezidi students o School building and logistics o Quality of teaching Yezidi language o Distance from educational institutions: school, high school, vocational education institution, distance from communities o Impossibility to pass the entry exams o Absence of extracurricular groups. • The main reasons for the exclusion of children from the Yezidi community are: o The community has a fear of assimilation, which is why education in the community is seen as a process that promotes assimilation. o There is a custom in the community to drop out of school before the age of 16 to marry or avoid early marriage for girls, and for boys due to family roles or migration attitudes. o High school, is not available in all communities. • After online classes, there was a risk for Yezidi children that parents would not send their children to school or culture of getting an education without attending school developed. This circumstance's opportunity for Yezidi students not to be deprived of the right to education without leaving home.

Gibson, M. A. & Ogbu, J. U. (1991) Minority status and schooling; a comparative study of immigrant and involuntary minorities (New York, London). Gillborn, D. & Mirza, H. S. (2000) Educational inequality: mapping race, class and gender—a synthesis of research evidence (London, OFSTED) Education Problems of Yezidi children in Armenia, research report, 2021, Center for Educational Research and Consulting, Eurasia Partnership Foundation Luciak M., (2004) Minority status and schooling—John U. Ogbu’s theory and the schooling of ethnic minorities in Europe, Intercultural Education Vol. 15, No. 4 Ogbu, J. U. & Matute-Bianchi, M. (1986) Understanding sociocultural factors: knowledge, identity, and school adjustment, in: Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center, California State University (Eds) beyond language: social and cultural factors in schooling language minority students (Los Angeles, California State University, Evaluation, Dissemination, and Assessment Center.), 73–142 Ogbu, J. U. (1995) Cultural problems in minority education: Their interpretations and consequences—part two: case studies, The Urban Review, 27(4), 271–297. Ogbu, J. U. (2003) Black students in an affluent suburb: a study of academic disengagement (Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum).