If the practicum is the most valued element of a teacher education program, how good is each teacher candidate's learning and how well is it supported by the university supervisor? While most self-studies of teacher education practices focus on practices in the university classroom, this article reports an analysis of a supervisor's practices, with special attention to underlying assumptions of the supervisor. Data permitted identification of patterns in the supervisor's pedagogy and in teacher candidates' responses to that pedagogy. The supervisor's underlying assumptions and the contribution of conversations with a critical friend were identified. A table was constructed to contrast the assumptions in two stances toward supervision, one characterized as transmission and the other as interpretation. Conclusions emphasize the importance of listening to each candidate's voice and including a metacognitive element in a supervisory conversation after a lesson observation.