Since physics is a natural science that examines the fundamental principles of the universe from the atomic scale to the universe and explains them with mathematical models, students are expected to think critically and structure their arguments with logical justifications during this process. Argumentation allows students to understand physics concepts more deeply, create claims, collect evidence for claims and support the relationship between claims and evidence with scientific evidence. In this respect, argumentation increases both the level of conceptual understanding and mental skills in physics education.
The increase in argumentation studies in physics education in recent years necessitates determining the findings obtained in research conducted in this field and revealing the effectiveness of the method used.

In this context, meta-analysis, one of the most appropriate methods, provides statistical integration of quantitative findings obtained from research based on experimental and control groups. The fact that this method is both a tool for evaluating findings and a meticulous quantitative synthesis approach has made it an important place in educational research.
This meta-analysis study aims to determine the general effect of the approach on students' academic success by examining peer-reviewed articles published between 2005 and 2025 in which argumentation was used in physics education.

The research questions are:
1. What is the effect of argumentation on students' academic success in physics education?
2. Does the effect of argumentation on students' academic success differ according to their level of education?
3. Does the effect of argumentation on students' academic success differ according to the duration of application?

During the data collection process, a systematic literature search was conducted in international databases such as Web of Science, ERIC, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar with the keywords "Argumentation, Argumentation-based learning, Scientific argumentation and Physics education". Only studies reporting sufficient statistical data (mean, standard deviation, effect size), using experimental design and published in indexed journals were included in the study. Meta-analysis of eligible studies was performed with the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) program. Hedges’ g was preferred as the effect size criterion. Subgroup analyses were conducted to examine the effects of education level and application duration; funnel plots and Egger regression test were used to determine publication bias.

As a result of the meta-analysis, it was determined that argumentation based learning in physics education generally has a positive effect on students’ academic success. In the vast majority of the studies examined, it was observed that students who applied this approach understood physics concepts better and their scientific thinking and problem-solving skills improved. When subgroup analyses were examined, it was seen that this effect varied according to the students’ education level and the application duration also played a decisive role in this effect. These findings are believed to provide empirical evidence for the effectiveness of argumentation-based learning in physics education. By systematically evaluating the research in the existing literature, a clearer understanding of the strengths and areas for improvement of this method is provided.

Keywords: Argumentation, Argumentation-Based Learning, Physics Education, Meta-Analysis.