drastically. Actually, only 23 percent of the 256 children 10 months and older manage to achieve a verbal score in line with or better than their chronological age."

In other words, 77 percent of these children are verbally retarded. In contrast, 47 percent of the children show motor development equal to or above their chronological age. Similarly, 40 percent of the group equal or surpass expectancy for their age in the adaptive sphere, and 44 percent in the personal-social sphere.

There is still another fact about the verbally effective children that sets them apart-63 percent of these more verbal children excel in all four areas covered by the intelligence test, while another 23 percent excel in three areas; in all, then 86 percent of the verbally able children show what might be termed pervasive or global intelligence.

The contrast of the conspicuous lack of verbal effectiveness in a large percentage of the population, and the global ability of the comparatively few children who do possess verbal skills, makes it apparent that the acquisition of such skills plays a most significant part in determining the level and nature of the child's functioning.

The verbal disability of a large percentage of these children, Dr. Halpern states, stems from many sources. To begin with, this is a group of children who rarely if ever have contact with outsiders, and consequently communicating with a stranger whom they have just encountered proved to be quite a traumatic experience. Even with the encouragement, reassurance and support of the mother, relatively few of these children could break through the barriers that their entire life experience had developed.

Again, children whose mothers are harassed by many obligations, who spend 12 or more hours working in the fields or in someone else's kitchen, are not very likely to enjoy the maternal play and verbal interchange that children in more fortunate circumstances often know and relate to many "mothers" including older siblings, grandmother, neighbor, and so on.

There is no consistent speech pattern to be followed under such circumstances-rather, there is only a shifting and confusing world. In general, the child is wanted and loved, regardless of the poverty that exists in the home. This love expresses itself through much body contact during the early months of life, much playing and fondling by the various members of the household.

However, as soon as the child begins to move about and explore his environment, as soon as he makes any attempt to assert and fulfill himself, he is vigorously and unequivocally cut down. He is then very likely to be told that he is "bad," "nothing," "worthless," et cetera, and assured that he will never amount to anything.

This attitude on the part of those caring for the child is actually an expression of their love for him. As they see it, if he is to survive in the hostile white world of the delta he must be discouraged from any kinds of independent, self-realizing activities, from anything that might bring him to the negative attention of the white man.

The end result of this training is excessive inhibition and repression for the majority of these children. They learn very early to adopt the overly compliant, conforming facade that characterizes the manner of the adults whenever they are in contact with outsiders.

In fact, they soon learn to live two lives, one that is acceptable to Mr. Charlie, the other a simple but freer one that they can follow when they are with their own people. In order to maintain this dichotomy much that they think and feel must be kept out of awareness.

For some children the process becomes automatic, but for some it requires constant alertness and absorbs much energy. In either case the inhibitions that are placed on the child and that he gradually places on himself do not leave him open to new ideas, but seriously hamper the whole learning process even at the ages of 2 and 3.

The universal impact of this training soon overshadows whatever individual differences might have existed among these children. In this connection it is interesting to note that in testing the adults in this population one can predict with a high degree of success just what items will be passed and which failed, regardless of age, education, and occupation.

In addition to the large, changing, and confusing household to which these children are exposed there is also the problem of physical health. Inadequate diet and the possibility of resulting brain damage, the presence of anemia in varying degrees of severity in all but a very small percentage of these children may also account for their depressed intellectual functioning as they grow older.

It is certainly likely that physical factors play an important part in the overall picture. However, the importance of psychological factors should not be minimized. Even if these children were to receive adequate nutrition through Government supplementation or some other source they would probably still test below expectance because of the absence of adequate and appropriate stimulation in conjunction with the repressive effects of family training.

Children who have no toys, no books to look at, no puzzles or games, who are not encouraged to explore their world or helped to cope with it in discriminating fashion, who are not permitted to speak their minds, will not learn and grow as they should, no matter how much food they receive.

At the time that we made our own recommendations for combating these problems, we had no knowledge of the bill before this committee. Yet, our proposals are almost identical. We felt that one possible solution for this problem might be the establishment of a pre-Headstart program, beginning no later than 1 year of age and possibly even earlier. Such a program would require the services of a large number of aides, one for each three or four children, the same aide working with and mothering the same child each day.

She would be taught to talk to the child, to play with him, and encourage exploration and self-fulfillment rather than discouraging and repressing such activities.

The relationship that would develop between the aide and the child, as well as the regularity of his attendance at the pre-Headstart school, with its routine activities, would provide the child with a sense of consistency and continuity, thus giving him more stability and selfawareness than he currently enjoys.

The program would, of course, also provide input in the form of age-appropriate toys, books, and other objects that are not available in the home.

Most important would be the involvement of the mothers in such a program. Her involvement would have to be much greater than it is in current Headstart programs. She should be urged to visit the school regularly, at specified times, as often as once or even twice a week if possible. The nature of the program and the reasons for the various activities should be explained to her and she should be urged to try to continue such activities in the home.

The school personnel should be ready to help a mother work out a home program if she indicates that she would like to bring the school concept into the home.

In some areas bringing the appropriate input into the home rather than into a school program has certain advantages. Which course should be pursued depends in large part on the nature of the area under consideration, the wishes of the parents, and the feasibility of one type of program as opposed to another.

Such questions as the availability of aides, supervisors and even playrooms must all be considered. Even in crowded homes, with many older children, some mothers have been able to follow the advice given them in regard to the rearing of their youngest children.

In summary, we felt, it seems shockingly true that adverse environmental conditions, characterized by the absence of adequate and appropriate stimulation, plus repressive child-rearing practices, have impaired the mental development of large numbers of southern black rural children.

In addition it is possible that they are further hampered by malnutrition which may have produced some brain damage, and certainly leaves many of them lethargic, distractible, and vulnerable to many types of illness.

If these children are to develop what clearly appear to be adequate and even better than adequate potentialities rather than lose these assets as they grow older, considerable modification in their current mode of life, increased stimulation of an appropriate order at each age level, a sense of consistency and stability to provide security and self-awareness, and improved diet are all imperative.

At the same time, mothers must be assured that age-old survival techniques are no longer essential and more crippling than facilitating. This is a long, hard road but it must be pursued.

Thank you for allowing me to present this testimony.

Senator NELSON. Doctor, referring to your chart, this is a study of 344 children.

Dr. GEIGER. Yes.

Senator NELSON. DQ stands for

Dr. GEIGER. Developmental Quotient.

Senator MONDALE. Is that the same as IQ?

Dr. GEIGER. It is roughly the equivalent for children below age 4. I should add, because I have omitted it, that this is the work of Dr. Florence Halpern, one of the country's most distinguished psychologists. I am not a psychologist, but what I know is from my discussions with her.

Senator NELSON. The study made by Dr. Halpern covers these 344 children, who were chosen at random, I take it? Dr. GEIGER. Yes.

Senator NELSON. And it shows an intelligence quotient 17 points higher than the national average for the white child?

Dr. GEIGER. Yes; at 3 months.

Senator NELSON. And then that score fell very rapidly in the months following, due to environmental influences?

Dr. GEIGER. I think the whole environment. We can't make a case for nutrition alone, because poor nutrition runs across the board for all of these children. Wherever one is anemic, and 90 percent of them were, you can't relate anemia to this kind of performance.

I don't think we are going to solve this problem merely by giving children food, though food is essential.

Senator NELSON. The question I would like to have you address yourself to is the question of why these 344 miscellaneous selected children averaged 17 points higher than the average miscellaneously selected white children. Is that a question of survival of the fittest, so to speak?

Dr. GEIGER. Yes; I think so. This has been found before, particularly among blacks.

The weight of the evidence, I suggest very clearly, suggests that when the national white norms are constructed, they include all of those frail white children who have been saved by good medical care, but possibly with genetic defects and other kinds of defects. All of those children have died, or most of them have, among the black children, because they do not survive, and, yes, indeed, you are looking at the consequences of survivorship.

You have to be good to survive an infant mortality rate of 70 per 1,000.

The environment, the lack of food, the lack of toys, the lack of heat, the lack of clothing, the lack of time for stimulation or equipment for it comes along and whomps them.

A second decline begins at 15 months, and from there on it is all downhill.

Senator NELSON. Have there been any studies over a sufficient period of time to see what recovery could be made if the environmental situation and the nutritional and educational situation changed?

Dr. GEIGER. I think there have been studies of maintenance. Senator Mondale pointed out Dr. Schaeffer's studies in Washington. It is possible to prevent the decline. I am not familiar with data suggesting how good a job we can do at pulling it back un

I think our observational data shows that it is slow, and it is much more expensive and wasteful than averting it in the first place.

I think we know very little about the long-term effects of this damage. Where the nutritional defect is severe, I doubt it is reparable. If 50 percent of the ability is laid down in 4 years, these children are 3 years behind by the time they are going to have to do 50 percent of what is going to equip them mentally for the rest of their lives. That would be a slow, expensive process.

Senator MONDALE. In your testimony, you refer to the black child's need to in effect play a role in the white power structure in Mississippi, and that the black parents actually help train the child to perform as the white man would like to see him perform, apparently by appearing to be less able than he might be, by being obsequious and differential, by performing in a way that appears that he knows he is bad, or worthless.

Could you dwell on that a moment and perhaps advise the committee on what kind of impact that role playing might have on his perception of himself?

Dr. GEIGER. I think, and this is, again, without-well, being a psychologist myself, this has a striking and easily visible effect on behavior. One can see suppression of normally inquisitive behavior. Indeed, part of what our nurses were referring to when they said a child could be identified that had been in Headstart was this kind of increased inquisitiveness and aggressiveness.

There is no question that until the Mississippi of 1963 or 1964, which I think now is very significantly beginning to change, this kind of behavior had survival value.

This is the kind of behavior that today's generation of black parents in Mississippi has internalized to a very great extent, and what is operating now is a kind of vestigial and increasingly inappropriate hangover, which is nonetheless very real.

Senator MONDALE. Can a child play this role that he is taught, to adjust to the white power structure of Mississippi, without coming to believe he is inadequate?

Dr. GEIGER. I think this is internalized, and that there is the burden,... at best, for the child to conduct a kind of a dual life, an internal life that is suppressed or acted out in very limited and private circumstances, and a different one than the public life.

I think this can be changed. I think it can be changed in a family' centered way, with continuity and encouragement of the parents, with discovery that other kinds of behavior in the child are safe and enjoyable and possible, as, indeed, in themselves.

If we are to have any racial understanding in the South as well as in other parts of the country, I think changes of this kind have to occur. If I really want to find out what is happening in a given black family, what the problem is, what has been done with a problem-and it may be a medical or other kind of problem-I have long since learned that I am better off with a Negro colleague or aide finding that

out.

Senator MONDALE. We have, in this proposal, placed administrative authority in the local CAP agency. You commented on your view of that with respect to the health services.

This conflicts with others who say it should be professionally done, that the poor and deprived are not fully able to comprehend what their children need.

Could you comment on that dispute?

Dr. GEIGER. I think, first of all, with regard to the local CAP agencies, we do face a different situation in the rural South, in which CAP boards very often are creatures of the power structure; on the proposal for the Tufts-Delta Health Center, if it had had to go through a Mississippi CAP agency, we simply wouldn't be there today, and all of you are familiar with the history of the child development group in Mississippi and its efforts to maintain independence and autonomy.

The great fear and the great threat to the power structure in the Headstart proposal of the child development group of Mississippi was that it provided for autonomy, jobs, and programs in the control of black people that did not run through and were not subject to the white power structure.