If it feels like your child’s school is talking about attendance more than it used to, there is a reason. Michigan released new Student Attendance and Engagement Guidance in July 2026 as part of a statewide effort to reduce chronic absenteeism. MDE reported that nearly 28% of Michigan students—387,934 students—missed at least 10% of the 2024-25 school year. ¹

Attendance improved, but chronic absence remains high

Michigan’s statewide attendance rate rose to 91.3% in 2024-25 and improved for the third consecutive year. At the same time, more than one in four students remained chronically absent. Those two facts can exist together because an average attendance rate can look fairly strong while a substantial group of individual students miss a large amount of school.

The focus is shifting toward earlier intervention

The 2026 guidance encourages schools to review attendance regularly instead of waiting for a student to accumulate a large number of absences. A percentage-based approach can identify risk earlier in the year. ²

Schools are being encouraged to ask why

The new guidance discusses root causes and barriers. Those can include health problems, housing instability, transportation, school climate, bullying, mental health, academic struggles, caregiving responsibilities, disengagement, and other factors.

Expect more calls, letters, and attendance meetings

Families may notice earlier outreach when a student misses several days. That contact can feel accusatory if the absences are legitimate, but the purpose should be to identify a pattern before it becomes harder to reverse. Parents can help by responding, checking the attendance record, explaining barriers, and asking for support rather than assuming the school already understands the situation.

Chronic absence is broader than truancy

Attendance Works distinguishes chronic absence from truancy. Chronic absence includes excused and unexcused missed days, while truancy usually centers on unexcused absences. ³ This distinction helps explain why schools may intervene even when a parent has followed the call-in procedure.

What good attendance intervention should look like

A strong response should combine clear expectations with practical support. Schools should not treat a student with cancer treatment, a homeless student, a child with school refusal, and a teenager intentionally skipping class as though the same solution will work for all four.

The increased attention to attendance is likely to continue. For families, the most useful response is to keep communication open, document legitimate barriers, and ask the school to address the reason for absences—not only the number.