Online Courses, Offline Grades: What Some Michigan Schools Are Doing

Introduction

For the 2023-24 school year, 613 of Michigan’s 899 public school districts (approximately 68%) reported at least one virtual enrollment (Freidhoff et al., 2025). In fact—based on data reported annually by Michigan Virtual—for nearly a decade, over 60% of Michigan’s public school districts have reported at least one virtual enrollment. As online learning becomes increasingly embedded in the K-12 landscape, understanding how student performance in these courses translates into local grading systems is essential. 

When a student completes an online course through Michigan Virtual, their final score is reported to their home district as a percentage based on the raw point total earned (e.g., 93%, which is based on 1402 points earned out of 1500 possible course points). It is up to each individual school district to determine what to do with that score and what letter grade (if applicable) to apply. For example, some districts simply take the score (reported as a percentage) and align it with their existing grading scale. Others may incorporate additional local metrics, such as mentor evaluations, attendance, or extra credit, or reduce the score to a pass/fail designation.

While state guidance does outline expectations for awarding credit in online courses, it leaves significant room for local interpretation, including interpretation of student scores. Under Michigan’s Section 21f legislation, districts are required to “grant appropriate academic credit” for online courses and to list the course title on the transcript as it appears in the official syllabus. However, decisions about how the final grade appears—whether as a letter grade, percentage, or pass/fail designation—are largely left up to the individual district. 

Districts are also encouraged to set course completion criteria that align with those used in traditional face-to-face settings, helping to ensure consistent expectations across learning formats (Michigan Virtual, 2024). Even how credit for online courses is awarded (e.g., 0.5 or 1.0 credits) can vary by district, depending on local policies and how the course fits within graduation requirements. In short, while state law provides a framework, it is ultimately up to each district to determine how student scores in online courses are interpreted and applied.

To better understand how school districts interpret and award credit for students’ online course scores, the Michigan Virtual Learning Research Institute talked to eight Michigan Virtual-partnering districts. Their responses provide insight into trends and local adaptations in online course grading practices and policies. 

Participating School District Demographics

The eight participating school districts reflect a broad cross-section of Michigan’s educational landscape. Their demographic differences—ranging in size, racial composition, and geographic locale—help contextualize the variability in grading practices. See Figure 1 below. 

Figure 1. Participating School District Demographics

Design and Approach

This initial snapshot draws on responses from eight Michigan K–12 public school districts. Each district was asked a series of questions about how they handle student scores from online courses, including how those scores are incorporated into local grading systems. One district responded only to the primary question, while the others provided more detailed information. Because the sample is small and limited to Michigan Virtual partner districts, these observations shouldn’t be viewed as representative of all Michigan schools. Still, they offer a useful snapshot of current practices and some of the thinking behind them.

Overview of Grading Practices

Three broad grading approaches emerged from the data and are explained below:

1. Direct Translation to Local Scale (most common)
The majority of districts directly convert the score from Michigan Virtual courses (reported as a percentage) and align it to their local grading scale.

• Example: A score of 1402/1500 is reported by Michigan Virtual as 93%, which then corresponds to a letter grade based on the local grading system scale.

2. Score Adjustment with Local Inputs
Some districts factor in additional local metrics, such as attendance or mentor-assigned work, to adjust students’ final course grades.

• Example: A score of 1402/1500 is reported by Michigan Virtual as 93%, which, according to the student’s local school district, may represent 90% of the student’s final course grade, with the remaining 10% derived from attendance, extra credit, and/or mentor-assigned work.

3. Conversion to Pass/Fail or Credit/No Credit
A few districts simplify online course scores into formats like pass/fail or credit/no credit, especially for credit recovery courses (i.e., courses designed to help students make up academic credit for previously unsuccessful enrollment).

• Example: A score of 1402/1500 is reported by Michigan Virtual as 93%, which may be given a “pass/credit” by the student’s local school district. 
• Example: A score of 850/1500 is reported by Michigan Virtual as 57%, which may be given a “fail/no credit” by the student’s local school district.

Grading Method Breakdown

General Online Course Enrollments

Building on the grading approaches outlined above, Figure 2 below summarizes how each participating district accepts students’ online course scores. It reflects whether scores are accepted as-is (direct translation to local grading scale), adjusted with local inputs (e.g., attendance, mentor input), or converted to a pass/fail format (for credit recovery courses only), highlighting both consistencies and variations in how student scores are accepted and interpreted.

Figure 2. Grading Method Breakdown By Participating School Districts

Online AP Courses

While we didn’t directly ask school districts how they accept student scores in online AP (Advanced Placement) courses, three districts provided us with some insight into their practices. Two of the three districts indicated that they “weight” students’ online AP course scores. For example: 

• A grade of an A is given for any score between 85–100, etc.
• A grade of a B actually carries the weight of a 4.0
• One of the three districts indicated that they put AP courses on a 5-point scale. 

Despite the additional variability and adjustments mentioned above, all three of these districts indicated that the way they accept students’ online AP scores is consistent with their AP courses that are taught in-person at students’ home school buildings.

Online Credit Recovery Courses

While districts were not directly asked how they handle student scores in online credit recovery courses, three districts (D, F, and G) mentioned that scores in credit recovery courses are issued a pass/fail or credit/no credit grade only. 

Key Takeaways and Implications

The preliminary findings from this initial look reveal several important trends in how Michigan districts approach the translation of students’ online course scores into local grading systems. Most notably, the majority of the districts (75%, 6 out of 8) employ a straightforward method in which the scores students receive in their Michigan Virtual courses (reported as a percentage) are aligned with each student’s home school district grading scale. 

However, some districts adjust the Michigan Virtual course score using locally determined inputs. These adjustments may include small percentages added for in-person attendance, mentor-assigned work/feedback, or extra credit assignments. Although the adjustments are typically minor, they reflect an effort to localize the grading process and recognize forms of student engagement not captured by the online course alone. 

While a few districts indicated they “weight” students’ online AP courses—maintaining uniformity with their in-person AP counterparts—others did not provide a specific policy. In addition, a few districts indicated they issue pass/fail grades for scores earned in online credit recovery courses. 

Taken together, these findings suggest that while many districts favor a consistent process for accepting students’ online course scores, there is still considerable variability in how these scores are adjusted, weighted, and/or contextualized. Under Michigan’s Section 21f law, districts are required to grant academic credit for students’ online coursework; however, how their scores are ultimately interpreted and accounted for is largely left to local discretion. As online learning has evolved into a standard fixture in the educational landscape, greater alignment and transparency in grading policies will be essential to ensure fairness and clarity for all students.

Next Steps

To build on these insights, the Michigan Virtual Learning Research Institute will launch a quantitative survey in the fall of 2025 targeting a larger, strategic sample of Michigan K-12 public schools. Key topics that will be covered in the survey include: 

• Variation in acceptance of online course scores by course type (AP vs. regular vs. credit recovery)
• Local practices on adjusting online course scores
• Broader use of third-party platforms

While this snapshot offers an initial qualitative preview, a broader quantitative survey will enable MVLRI to test whether observed patterns hold across a more representative sample and explore correlations between grading practices and district demographic characteristics.

References

Freidhoff, J. R., DeBruler, K., Cuccolo, K., & Green, C. (2025). Michigan’s k-12 virtual learning effectiveness report 2023-24. Michigan Virtual. https://michiganvirtual.org/research/publications/michigans-k-12-virtual-learning-effectiveness-report-2023-24/ 

Michigan Virtual. (2024). Guide to virtual implementation: Under section 21f of the state school aid act. Michigan Virtual. https://michiganvirtual.org/research/publications/guide-to-virtual-course-implementation/ 

Footnotes

¹District C uses a direct translation of Michigan Virtual score to the local grading scale for the corresponding letter grade; however, some teachers use a weekly attendance/check-in grade weighted as 2% of students’ grade, with 98% of the weight being their Michigan Virtual score.

²District D awards up to 2.75% extra credit (earned via mentor-assigned activities) added to the percentage score reported by Michigan Virtual; however, credit recovery courses are pass/fail only.