This article originally appeared in The Detroit News January 14, 2026.
As Michigan schools enter a new year, state leaders often talk about fresh starts and renewed commitment to student success. But one set of numbers should give parents and policymakers pause: During the 2024-2025 school year, districts rated 98% of public-school teachers “effective,” even though 60% of Michigan students failed the state reading test.
An evaluation system that claims near-universal success while most students struggle is not measuring reality ― it’s obscuring it.
The disconnect has grown worse since the Legislature weakened Michigan’s teacher evaluation requirements in 2023. It repealed reforms passed more than a decade earlier that made it easier for school administrators to identify, reward and retain high-performing teachers.
The reforms required personnel decisions — teacher placement, retention, layoffs, merit pay, etc. — to be tied to job performance. They also required districts to base 40% of a teacher’s evaluation score on student growth and assessment data, half of which came from standardized test results.
By using standardized test data, district leaders can consistently measure a teacher’s impact on student learning over time. This information can be used to identify areas of a teacher’s practice that need improvement.
However, under the new law, only 20% of a teacher’s evaluation score must be based on student data. Plus, districts are no longer required to factor the students’ standardized test data into the evaluation rating. The Legislature also reduced the number of rating categories, making it more difficult to distinguish truly high-performing teachers from those who are merely meeting minimum expectations. The result is a system that varies widely by district and produces ratings that tell parents and policymakers very little.
But the uncomfortable truth is that Michigan’s teacher evaluation system was already failing long before lawmakers weakened it. Teacher effectiveness ratings soared for over a decade, with districts rating 97% to 99% of their teachers “effective” or “highly effective,” despite more rigorous evaluation policies. Meanwhile, reading and math scores declined.
Today, Michigan ranks 44th in the nation in fourth grade reading. State reading and math scores have yet to return to pre-pandemic levels. And still, districts rated 98% of their teachers “effective” — the highest rating state law permits under the new legislation. The teacher effectiveness ratings produced by the evaluation system ought to align more with students’ reading and math performance.
The problem seems to be with the implementation of state law at the district level. A simple comparison of evaluation ratings and student achievement between districts reveals a lack of consistency in how a teacher’s performance is measured by local officials.
In Bridgeport-Spaulding, for example, 100% of teachers were given an effective rating, but only 12% of its students in grades third through seventh scored proficient or higher on the state’s English Language Arts test.
Only 18% of Lansing students passed the state ELA test, but 97% of their teachers earned the highest evaluation rating.
School officials in the Detroit Public School Community District reported that 85% of its teachers were effective, while just 15% of their students scored proficient or higher on the reading test. Conversely, at Detroit Edison, a local charter school, 53% of students earned a score of proficient or higher, while administrators rated just 40% of its teachers effective.
Of course, teacher quality is not the only factor that affects student test scores. But pretending teacher performance has little to do with student outcomes—or refusing to measure it accurately—guarantees that struggling students remain stuck. Inflated ratings deprive school leaders of the information they need to support teachers who are struggling, reward those who are excelling and improve instruction overall.
Teacher evaluations should be a meaningful tool for professional growth, not a rubber stamp. When nearly everyone is rated effective regardless of results, the system fails teachers who want honest feedback and students who depend on effective instruction to succeed.
A new year is an opportunity to correct course. Michigan’s leaders should recommit to honest evaluations that reflect student performance, enforce consistent standards across districts and demand accountability when results don’t align with reality. Without that reset, the state risks beginning another year congratulating itself while too many students fall further behind.
