Triadic assessment professes to provide an opportunity for the equal sharing of voices in the practicum assessment process. Practicum assessment literature suggests that this is questionable, and proposes that triadic assessment is problematic within the early childhood practicum. This paper presents the findings from a study that explores how tertiary supervisors understand and practice assessment in the early childhood practicum. The paper focuses on when, how and why tertiary supervisors choose to speak or choose to remain silent as they participate in practicum assessment, and what they risk through that voice or silence. The post-structuralist concepts of discourse, subjectivity and power have been used as the framework for analysis.