Drawing upon discursive psychology as a theoretical and methodological framework, the author analyzes a set of five postobservation debrief conversations between novice teachers and their mentors. The author presents analysis and findings by highlighting how the interpretative repertoires of the rubric and protocol documents may be used to shape and limit what counts as reflective practice. Next, the author highlights contrasts in the ways in which participants oriented to reflection protocol documents either as authoritative or irrelevant. Finally, the author consider the implications of these orientations in terms of varied versions of reflection on practice.