When "Preschool in Three Cultures" was published in 1989, it attracted great attention, as a result of the insights into the three cultures explored as well as the methodology that anchored the research. What made the book so intriguing to many scholars, regardless of their geographical areas of interest, however, was the unique methodology employed by Joseph Tobin, David Wu, and Dana Davidson. The researchers videotaped activities conducted at preschools in Japan, China, and the United States, showed those videotapes to members of those three school communities, and asked them to comment on what they saw. This technique, which Tobin, Wu, and Davidson termed "video-cued multivocal ethnography," shifted attention from the actual events captured on video to the reactions of parents, teachers, school administrators, and faculty at university early childhood education programs. Recently, Tobin conducted a follow-up to his groundbreaking study. The researcher, with a new team of collaborators, returned to the three schools profiled in the original book to update and expand the original study. "Preschool in Three Cultures Revisited: China, Japan, and the United States," which is scheduled for release by the University of Chicago Press in July 2009, explores continuity and change in the three preschools profiled in the earlier volume. The "Comparative Education Review" (CER) invited five scholars to respond to material from the new book. The group of participants was organized to represent a range of views and areas of expertise. Included in the group are Susan Holloway, Catherine Lewis, Lynn Paine, Hidetada Shimizu, and Gita Steiner-Khamsi. All participants were provided access to the videos included in "Preschool in Three Cultures Revisited," along with excerpts of the sections in the book that discussed those scenes. Next, they were asked to respond to two questions, one focused on the methodology and the other on the analysis provided in the book. Finally, in an effort to facilitate a dialogue, responses to those questions were shared among the group, and participants were asked to comment on what they found most interesting about the remarks made by their colleagues in this moderated discussion.