Dr. BLOOM. I would say if we decided that everything had been decided by age 3 or 4, I think we would give up the ghost and do very little. I think the hope is that we can do things at later ages.

But let me try to say something. There seems to be some evidence that the curves I have drawn and general intelligence, verbal ability, seemed to be paralleled by certain neurological and chemical changes in the brain.

I think this is still speculative, the research is tending this way, and suggests at least for animals that early, very early experiences seem to have some effect on the organism as such, but I think that is less clear, although the evidence is accumulating this way.

The second kind of evidence that seems to be accumulating is the effect of later development on language. Unfortunately, our schools are language oriented. The child learns about music by being told about it rather than experiencing music directly. He learns about drama, about Shakespeare by reading Shakespeare rather than acting Shakespeare.

He learns most things in school through verbal interchanges and, therefore, the child who has a very good early verbal development is able to get a great deal out of school even if the teacher is very ineffective because the child can get it almost on his own.

The other kind of evidence is from the sequence of learning. That is, I think Paiget has described this sequence in terms of thinking. It is possible to see the sequence in terms of math, in terms of reading ability and the like. There are a series of steps in learning, and if one misses a number of these steps it is very, very difficult to complete this whole structure. And what we were finding in the schools is that there are a number of missing steps for particular children and our problem is to detect what these are and to go back and learn them.

The child who has not learned the basic arithmetic of the second and third grade is going to have enormous difficulty at the sixth or seventh grade and he is going to have even greater difficulty if he has to go on to higher maths."

So what I am trying to say, there are three kinds of evidence. One is the neurological and chemical evidence that begins to tell us if I don't do certain things in the early years there may be certain organic problems that cannot be altered.

The second is the emphasis on language. And, language seems to be developed very early. All of our evidence seems to indicate that the home is most important in the development of this basic language, or the absence of this particular development. Language development is basic to so much of what happens in school.

And the third has to do with sequence of learning, which is that there are certain learnings taking place before age 4 which builds. into learning taking place between 4 and 6 and so on. If some of these steps are missing it is very difficult to complete the sequence. I am in effect saying if there are certain things not done before 4 or 6, we have enormous difficulty in correcting them at later stages. Senator NELSON. I have to be on the floor of the Senate at 11 o'clock, so I will turn the hearings back to Senator Mondale.

Senator Murphy may have some further questions. But before I leave I want to thank you very much for finding time to come to these hearings.

STATEMENT OF DR. EARL S. SCHAEFER, RESEARCH PSYCHOLOGIST, CENTER FOR STUDIES OF CHILD AND FAMILY MENTAL HEALTH, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH, HEALTH SERVICES AND MENTAL HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Dr. Schaefer, we are delighted to have you here. I am particularly pleased, having visited your project, having had a chance to talk with some of your gifted people and having read some of your materials, to have you testify before us.

You have a long statement. You may proceed as you wish. I might suggest that we could include it as though read and you could emphasize those things that you think are most important in today's hearing and then we can go into the question-and-answer period. (The prepared statement of Dr. Schaefer follows:)

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. EARL S. SCHAEFER, RESEARCH PSYCHOLOGIST, CENTER FOR STUDIES OF CHILD AND FAMILY MENTAL HEALTH, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH, HEALTH SERVICES AND MENTAL HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate very much the opportunity to discuss some conclusions about child development that derive from my research on intellectual stimulation of disadvantaged infants. I am a developmental psychologist with sixteen years of research experience in studies of parent behavior and the social, emotional, and cognitive development of children. I would like to summarize my views and with your permission would like to insert supporting information from my own research and from that of others into the proceedings.

The importance of work on early intellectual development was impressed upon me by a number of studies that show that each social group-whether by socioeconomic status or ethnic group-has reached its own intellectual level prior to school entrance. The schools, in general, do not change that level. Several studies suggest that these levels of intellectual functioning may be established by three years of age and my own data show that differences in mental test scores between groups with different early experiences can be detected at 21 months, i.e., at the time we can measure language and complex skills. The emergence of these differences during the period of early relationships with gneral cognitive development, may be critical for later intellectual growth and academic and occupational achievement.

In fact, vocabulary scores correlate very highly with our principal mental tests and vocabulary scores are the best single predictor of both academic and occupational achievement. Several studies show that early verbal skills are better predictors of later intelligence than are non-verbal skills.

Language skills the ability to talk, to listen, to read, to write, and to thinkare the most important basis for academic and occupational competence. This fact suggests the importance of the questions, "How are language skills acquired, how are they taught, and what are the necessary conditions for their optimal development?"

In order to emphasize the importance of early experience for intellectual development I have developed a model of four basic stages in the typical child's development. The first stage is the development by the parent of a loving acceptance of, or positive involvement with the child.

Stage 1 parent+child

The positive involvement of the parent elicits from the child the development of a positive relationship with the parent in the second stage.

The third stage consists of the parent and child together engaging in an activity or exploring an object during which the parent through both verbal and non-verbal behavior teaches the child task-oriented behavior.

The fourth stage suggests that from this type of early experience with the parent, the child acquires the interests, the motivation, the cognitive and language skills that allow him to function effectively as an independent learner.

+Stage 4 child→ activity or object

Successful achievement of these early developmental stages in the home may be a necessary basis for successful education in the school.

I wish to stress that because of the existing differences in the early experience of children from different social groups there is no conclusive evidence that differences between groups in intellectual functioning can be attributed to differences in genetic potential. Until all children receive equal opportunity to develop in an accepting and stimulating environment, we cannot determine whether differences in intellectual potential exist. My own work on infant education shows that with four hours of individual tutoring each week between fifteen and thirty-six months low socio-economic status inner-city Negro children earn above average Stanford-Binet scores (Mean IQ=106) at three years while a control group showed low scores (Mean IQ=89) at that time. Evidence is accumulating rapidly that because of physical, social and emotional, and cultural deprivations, many children are not developing their genetic potential, and therefore do not function effectively in school and in society.

The physical deprivations include frequent sickness and the unavailability of adequate medical care; insufficient and low quality food, resulting in frequent periods of acute hunger as well as chronic malnutrition; housing that is poorly heated, poorly lighted, deteriorated, unsafe, and frequently invaded by roaches and rats; inadequate furnishing and household supplies; inadequate clothing, and the many other deprivations of poverty in our rural and urban slums.

The most important social and emotional deprivations are the lack of stable and supporting relationships including the lack of adequate maternal care and the lack of an adequate and competent father with an adequate income and a stable and status-conferring occupation.

Cultural deprivation frequently derives from parents who do not understand the importance of early development; and do not have the money to provide a stimulating environment. Children frequently do not have books, paper, pencils or crayons, toys and other educational materials or even floor space or a table surface for puzzles, games, and construction materials. Thus, they do not have the opportunity for training in attention, concentration, and persistence and in perceptual-motor and cognitive skills that are required in an academic setting. Low income children seldom have the stimulating experiences provided by affluent, highly motivated parents such as visits to a zoo, museum, public buildings, library, or even to the drugstore and grocery that through shared conversation build interest, language skills, and knowledge. Because of the lack of education of the parents and, frequently, their rural background, their dialect and lack of academic language skills, the parents are unable to provide a model of academic English and are unable to teach the skills required by the complex urban and academic culture in which their children live.

In order to understand the development of low income children, it is necessary to understand the factors that influence parent behavior as well as to understand the influence of parent behavior upon the child. Our studies show that parents who have experienced the deprivations discussed above frequently are unable to provide a better environment for their children unless given assistance in that task by other social institutions.

The social and emotional problems that frequently develop from early deprivation reduce social competence and the capacity for growth-supporting parent and child relationships. Also the many stresses and lack of social support that accompany poverty in themselves leave the parents without the material and personal resources to support the optimal development of their children. Research has explored a number of parent behaviors that influence the social, emotional, and cognitive growth of children. An accepting, loving, involvement

with the child has been found repeatedly to relate to intellectual development. This would include expression of affection by the parent, amount of contact and sharing with the child and a positive evaluation of the child as opposed to irritability, punitiveness, rejection, neglect and abuse. Clear evidence that these parental behaviors are influenced by poverty, poor health, stress, and lack of social support for the parent has been found in a number of studies of parents who neglect and abuse their children and in more representatives samples of parents. Other parent behaviors that are related to development of the child are verbal expressiveness with the child, reading to the child, the mother's interest in the child's education, the mother's teaching skills, and the many informal and formal educational activities of parents.

Studies have shown that adopted children, whose natural parents were of lower socio-economic status, frequently achieve above average intelligence test scores that are far above those of their natural parents. However, the IQ scores of the adopted children still correlate significantly with those of their natural parents. Genetics may determine the potential range of a child's intellectual level but the quality of the environment determines the child's actual intellectual level. Other studies show that supplementing early experience by working with the parent on the education of the child, by home tutoring, or by nursery school experiences for children in institutions can produce significant increases in intelligence test scores. Perhaps even more promising is a finding by Susan Gray and her colleagues that younger children from families in which parents have participated in the education of their older children in the home also show higher IQ levels, a phenomenon that she has called vertical diffusion. Gray's findings suggest that programs that work with parents can improve their methods of childrearing and early education.

Increases in physical height from generation to generation have apparently been produced by improved nutrition and health care. It is probable that with improved early child care, childrearing, and early education, higher levels of intellectual functioning may be developed by each succeeding generation. In fact, some evidence suggests that for some areas and perhaps for the entire nation, current levels of intellectual functioning are higher than those of previous generations. Low income and minority groups have not had equal access to the resources and to the knowledge that have contributed to those trends.

Several studies suggest that the lower the socio-economic status of the child and the greater his initial deprivation, the greater the increases in intellectual functioning produced by a given amount of additional intellectual stimulation. These data suggest that a high proportion of our total effort in child development, should be devoted to programs for low socio-economic status and minority group children. Research also suggests that much of our effort should be devoted to improving the childrearing competence of parents and future parents and the educational resources of families, for parents have total responsibility for the development of their children before school entrance and continue to have great influence upon the development and education of their children during the school years.

The knowledge we now have should be applied in programs designed to improve the early environment of disadvantaged children. However, evaluation of the costs and effectiveness of new programs and of current child care are an essential part of a child development program, just as cost-effectiveness and quality control are essential in technology and industry. More basic and applied research is needed to develop the knowledge that would produce more effective and more economical methods, materials, training procedures, and programs. The investment in research and development in the growth sciences should be proportional to the problems of low intellectual, academic, and occupational achievement and to the promise of higher levels of competence that such work might yield.

Research in biological sciences has led to astonishing increases in the productivity of agriculture. Research in the physical sciences has led to the great achievement and productivity of technology and industry. The findings of previous child development research show that investments in research and development in what Bruner has called the growth sciences would lead to a better adjusted, more competent, and more intelligent population. Such research would contribute to the development of the values, the motivations, and the skills required to cope with our current and future problems and opportunities.

In summary I have suggested that children, in the early years of life, lear the language and many of the skills and interests of the culture in which th