Scott Harrison gives the official view on what history teachers can expect from an OFSTED inspection. He emphasises the need to communicate, as fully as possible, the department's rationale underlying all professional practice. This is essential if the inspector is to analyse the reasons why standards are as they are. What, for example, is department's thinking about how pupils make progress and how does this underpin the approach to planning, from detailed lesson objectives through to the wider workscheme? If the inspector is equipped with such contextual understandings he or she can also make a more informed judgement about the effectiveness of a particular teaching episode. He also lists some of the characteristics of ‘good teaching', placing a strong emphasis on the quality of pupils' responses and the use the teacher makes of these both within the lesson itself and in subsequent departmental evaluation. Note, too, that this piece is for the inspector as much as for the teacher! The inspector is reminded of his or her obligations. The inspector should judge each department on its own merits, and not impose particular, personal views on curriculum structure or philosophy.