Apologies: this has nothing to do with behaviour, but I value the views of people on this forum. Our SMT is carrying out lesson observations based on "Ofsted criteria". A few teachers that I see as being good are being labelled as satisfactory because in their lesson "students are reliant on teacher input"; this puts the progress made in the satisfactory bracket. Today this happened to me: despite knowing that the pupils knew more when they left the classroom than when they entered (is progress the word to describe this, perhaps?), it was "too teacher led" and the progress was categorised as satisfactory as a result. I would never be so arrogant as to proclaim myself as being an outstanding teacher, but I know that those kids made good progress--does it matter how that progress was made? It's not like I stood at the front and fed those kids a diet of power point: I used Q&A to build up an understanding, paired talk, modelling, got the kids to write answers to questions, and listened --giving feedback-- to those answers. I've been informed that to achieve "good" in progress the kids need to be learning independently or in *shudder* groups; that aint me. I struggle to think how children can independently understand Pythagorean theorem, electricity and atomic theory. I'd like to think that's why I'm in the room with them. I can only come to two conclusions: [*]-The ofsted criteria is stupid and based on political ideologies rather than based on objective evidence of what actually works. [*]-My school has misinterpreted the Ofsted criteria. I've looked for the official Ofsted lesson observation criteria but can not find it ( http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/search/apachesolr_search/lesson%20observation%20criteria ). All I can find is other people's version of it. I've emailed Ofsted asking for a copy. You'd think, what with Ofsted banging the drum about assessment, they'd make it easy to find an official copy of what teachers will be assessed against; hypocrisy? Thoughts?