BECE. Newsletter BECE, Vol.9, No.2, 2021 1273 Can Programming Really Promote Individual Devel- opment of Children? A Meta-analysis on 28 Experi- mental and Quasi-experimental Studies By Sun, L.H. & Hu, L.L. Correspondence to: Sun, L.H., Tianjin University. E-mail: sunlh777@163.com S a basic skill of children facing the future, adapting to the future, and transforming the future, programming has continuously received atten- tion from all walks of life. Scholars have carried out a great deal of experi- mental and quasi-experimental research, but the results of the research differ. To respond to the topic “whether children’s programming promotes chil- dren’s individual development”, a study from Journal of East China Normal University (Education Science Edition) adopted a meta-analysis method to conduct empirical research on the influence of programming on individual development by reviewing 28 independent studies and 74 effect sizes that can be used for analysis. The research results were evaluated to summarize the degree of influence of programming on the individual development of children. In addition, the study further analyzed the differences in the influ- ence of programming on the individual development of children by different stages, programming styles, sample sizes, and experimental cycles, to obtain scientific and reasonable conclusions and provide a feasible reference for the subsequent progress in children’s programming education research and prac- tice. The important findings of the study are as follows:  In this study, the combined effect size of the overall impact of pro- gramming on children’s individual development is SMD = 0.61 > 0.5, which shows that programming has a positive effect on chil- dren’s individual development.  This study further measured the specific effects of programming on children’s individual development from three dimensions: cognition, behavior and emotion. © 2021 Insights Publisher. All rights reserved. Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed by the Insights Publisher. A mailto:sunlh777@163.com BECE, Vol.9, No.2, 2021 1274 First, at the cognitive level, the combined effect size of programming on individual children is (SMD = 0.86, p < 0.001), reaching a statistically significant level, indicating that programming can significantly and actively promote the cognitive development of students. Specifically, programming influences mathematical thinking (SMD = 2.68, p < 0.001), academic achievement (SMD = 0.61, p < 0.001), knowledge transfer (SMD = 0.82, p < 0.001) and computational thinking (SMD = 0.50, p < 0.001). The impacts reach a significant level. Second, at the behavioral level, the combined effect size of program- ming on children’s individual development is (SMD = 0.34, p < 0.001), indi- cating that programming has a significant intermediate effect on children’s behavior development, specifically, in pair ranking ability (SMD = 0.65, p < 0.001), classification planning (SMD = 0.31, p < 0.05), problem solving (SMD = 0.25, p < 0.05) and collaborative innovation (SMD = 0.40, p < 0.01) The impacts are of significant levels. Finally, at the emotional level, the combined effect size of program- ming on children’s individual development is (SMD = 0.31, p < 0.001), indi- cating that programming has a significant intermediate effect on children’s emotional development. Specifically, programming has significant impacts on learning interest (SMD = 0.51, p < 0.01) and children’s self-efficacy (SMD = 0.22, p < 0.05), and the impacts on children’s learning motivation (SMD = 0.19, p > 0.05) and learning participation (SMD = 0.20, p > 0.05) are not significant. Overall, programming has significant positive effects on children’s cognitive, behavioral, and emotional development, and it has the most prom- inent effect on cognitive development.  From the perspective of different learning stages, there is no signifi- cant difference between the group effects (Chi 2 = 2.67, p > 0.05) of children’s programming in preschools, elementary schools and mid- dle schools. The effects of programming on the individual develop- ment of students at different school stages are ranked in order of the combined effect size: middle school (SMD = 0.77, p < 0.001), pre- school (SMD = 0.56, p < 0.001) and elementary school (SMD = 0.52, p < 0.001) ).  From the perspective of different experimental cycles, there are sig- nificant differences in the impact of programming experiment cycles of different lengths (Chi 2 = 24.68, p < 0.001) on the individual de- velopment of children. Specifically, the short-term experiment had the highest combined effect size (SMD = 0.43, p < 0.001), followed by the long-term experiment (SMD = 0.26, p < 0.001), and the mid- term experiment had the lowest combined effect size (SMD = 0.24, p < 0.001).  From the perspective of different sample sizes, the intergroup effect size shows Chi 2 = 23.53, p < 0.001, reaching a significant level, in- dicating that there are significant differences in the influence of pro- gramming on the individual development of large, medium, and BECE, Vol.9, No.2, 2021 1275 small-scale of student sample. Specifically, the small-scale com- bined effect size (SMD = 0.41, p < 0.001) is higher than that of the medium-scale (SMD = 0.37, p < 0.001) and higher than the large- scale combined effect size (SMD = 0.17, p < 0.001). This shows that small-scale programming activities have a more significant impact on children’s individual development than medium-scale and large- scale programming activities. Moreover, there is a negative correla- tion between the sample size and the effect. As the sample size in- creases, the effect gradually decreases. This finding can provide a reference for the design and development of subsequent program- ming activities.  From the perspective of different programming forms, the intergroup effect size shows Chi 2 = 32.72, p < 0.001, reaching a significant lev- el, indicating that there are significant differences in the role of dif- ferent programming forms in promoting the individual development of children. Specifically, unplugged programming has the highest combined effect size (SMD = 1.47, p < 0.001), followed by LOGO programming (SMD = 0.78, p < 0.05), other programming forms (SMD = 0.41, p < 0.001), and Scratch (SMD = 0.23, p < 0.001) with the lowest combined effect size, which indicates that unplugged programming is significantly better than other programming forms in promoting the individual development of children. However, there is a possibility that this is caused by the differences among us- ers in different groups. In summary, the analysis results affirm the importance of program- ming to children’s growth and its positive role in promoting individual de- velopment. However, research results also shows that programming educa- tion will present different effects when facing different learners and learning situations. Therefore, programming teaching practice should not be carried out blindly. Instead, it should be designed and planned scientifically and rea- sonably according to the different elements of the teaching system. Source: Journal of East China Normal University, Educational Sciences, 2021; 39(11):45-58.