This study explores history teachers’ conditions for planning teaching based on progression. It focuses on transition processes: what information is passed on as pupils move from one stage or school form to the next, and how do the receiving teachers deal with the extent and character of that information in their own planning. Previous research on transitions has mainly focused on the transition from pre-school to schooling, indicating that social stability promotes positive educational effects. By contrast, our study covers a broader spectrum of stage transitions and focuses specifically on history teaching, thereby highlighting that teachers who receive new pupils also need information on the curriculum contents they have encountered, and what knowledge they have developed. The study is based on semi-structured interviews with seven teachers from grade four to upper secondary school. The interviews centre on the teachers’ perceptions of the information they receive from the previous stage, their descriptions of how transition practices are organised, their use of information for planning, and their understanding of what progress in history teaching means. These concerns are reflected in the theoretical point of departure, emphasizing the conditions for predictability and the creation of information continuity in complex social systems. To this end, we have used Niklas Luhmann’s concepts of person, role and program, to disentangle the different ways in which information continuity can be achieved within school organization.  The results of the study show that the teachers do encounter programs for passing on information about social aspects and learning difficulties. Information about curriculum content, however, is not mandatory and transition practices here are both varied and less rich in information. This is consonant with the pressure exerted by school legislation to document aspects pertaining to individuals and their rights, and the lack of binding demands on the organization of teaching and subject matter. One consequence of this is that transition practices cannot be relied upon to ensure information continuity. Nor is the curriculum in itself sufficiently specific and time-ordered to serve as program in this sense. It gives teachers little guidance for selection, thus creating information insecurity throughout the educational chain. A second result of the study concerns how receiving the teachers’ conceptions and practices are shaped by the way they deal with this information insecurity. They either set out to find the information they need, or they limit their planning to what they can control, and do not consider what their new pupils have studied at the previous stage. A third result is that only two of the teachers interviewed understood progression in history as progression in the subject matter from grade one to upper secondary school. The teachers tended to think about progression in terms pupil/student achievement and their assessment of these achievements.