Michigan Senate Bill SB0378

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 6/10/25
• Refer: 6/10/25

Caption

Education: school districts; letter grade system for ranking public schools; provide for. Amends 1976 PA 451 (MCL 380.1 - 380.1852) by adding sec. 1280h.

Summary

Senate Bill 378 would require the Michigan Department of Education to create and publish an annual letter-grade rating system for every public school beginning with the 2025-2026 school year. Each school would receive an A, B, C, D, or F for multiple performance indicators, including student proficiency in math and English language arts, student growth in those subjects, English learner progress toward language proficiency, high school graduation rates, and how a school’s academic performance compares with schools serving similar student populations. The bill gives the department discretion to define some of the rating methods, especially for growth measures and for identifying comparable school populations. It also allows the department to use existing growth tools, including the model value-added growth and projection analytics system, and to base comparisons on demographic factors that correlate strongly with academic achievement. The grading system would be updated by the start of each school year and would become part of the state’s school accountability framework under the Revised School Code.

Impact

The bill would amend the Revised School Code by adding a new section requiring statewide school report cards in the form of letter grades. It would affect public schools across Michigan by imposing a standardized performance-rating system tied to state assessment results, growth metrics, English learner progress, graduation rates, and peer comparisons. The Department of Education would gain responsibility for calculating and assigning the grades, while CEPI would continue to provide graduation-rate data as referenced in the bill.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to be framed as an accountability and transparency proposal rather than a controversial policy change with recorded debate in the provided materials. The bill’s structure suggests support for clearer public reporting of school performance, especially through easily understood letter grades. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no documented legislative sentiment beyond the bill’s apparent intent.

Contention

The main likely points of contention are the use of letter grades to rank schools, the fairness of comparing schools with different student populations, and the department’s broad discretion in defining growth measures and peer groups. Critics could argue that such a system oversimplifies school performance or disadvantages schools serving higher-need students, while supporters would likely view the grades as a straightforward accountability tool for parents and policymakers. Because no hearing transcript or vote record was included, no specific lawmakers or stakeholder groups are identified in the available materials.