This paper reviews the suitability at the kindergarten level of Philadelphia's new K-12 Standardized Curriculum in terms of concerns expressed by a group of Philadelphia kindergarten teachers. The teachers' objections spring from two different conceptions of early childhood education. According to one argument (rejected by the district but supported by the work of Gesell), children's developmental readiness should determine the content of the kindergarten curriculum. Opposed to this argument are arguments supporting early intervention to prepare children for learning. Such intervention can take either a formal or an experiential form. Those teachers objecting to the curriculum but supporting intervention appear concerned that the curriculum will require formal, specified instructional practices. The district claims that its direct instruction curriculum does not require formal instruction, and asserts further that the demographic characteristics of the poor urban students being served are such that the educational environment must be fundamentally different from (rather than reliant on) the home environment. This assertion is supported by Philadelphia's extensive experience with Follow Through programs. The paper concludes that it is important to work toward the best match of teacher, student, school, and instructional method. (PGD)