• Anil, D. and Ozer, Y. (2012). The effect of the aim and frequency of computer usage on student achievement according to PISA 2006. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 5484- 5488.
• Aypay, A. (2010). Information and communication technology (ICT) usage and achievement of Turkish students in PISA 2006. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9, 116-124.
• Biagi, F. and Loi, M. (2013). Measuring ICT use and learning outcomes: Evidence from recent econometric studies. European Journal of Education, 48(1), 28-42.
• Bielefeldt, T. (2006).Computer and student learning: interpreting the multivariate analysis of PISA 2000.International Society for Technology in Education, 37(4), 339-347.
• Blackwell, C., Lauricella, A., and Wartella, E. (2014). Factors Influencing digital technology use in early education. Computers and Education, 77, 82-90.
• Cheema, J.R., and Zhang, B. (2013). Quantity and quality of computer use and academic achievement: Evidence from a large-scale international test program. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 9(2), 95-106.
• Delen, E., and Bulut, O. (2011). The relationship between students’ exposure to technology and their achievement in science and math. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10,311-317.
• Demir, I. and Kiliç, S. (2009). Effects of computer use on students’ mathematics achievement in Turkey. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 1802-1804.
• Educational Testing Service (ETS). (2004). ICT literacy assessment. Retrieved from http://www.ets.org/Media/Tests/Information_and_Communication_Technology_Litera cy/0202heapaper.pdf.
• Elisha, M. J. (2006). The application of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in Nigerian academic libraries prospects and problems. Information Manager, 6(1), 35-39.
• Eveline, G., Julian, F., Wolfram, S., Kate, O., Chris, F., Martin, M., and John, A. (2012). National Assessment Program—ICT Literacy 2011 Year 6 and Year 10 Technical Report. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/ict_literacy/4
• Flores, R., Inan, F., and Lin, Z. (2013). How do the Different Types of Computer Use Affect Math Achievement? Journal of Computers in Math and Science Teaching, 32(1), 67-87.
• Fuchs, T. and Wossmann, L. (2004). Computers and student learning: bivariate and multivariate evidence on the availability and use of computers at home and at school. Brussels Economic Review, 47(3-4), 359-386.
• Gil-Flores, J., Torres-Gordillo, J. J., and Perera-Rodriguez.V. H. (2012). The role of online reader experience in explaining students’ performance in digital reading. Computers and Education, 59(2), 653-660.
• Grinager, H. (2006). How education technology leads to improved student achievement. National Conference of State Legislatures, Retrieved from http://www.ncsl.org/portals/1/documents/educ/item013161.pdf.
• Gumus, S. and Atalmis, E. H. (2011). Exploring the relationship between purpose of computer usage and reading skills of Turkish students: evidence from PISA 2006. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10, 129-140.
• Güven, B. and Kosa, T. (2008). The effect of dynamic geometry software on student mathematics teachers’ spatial visualization skills. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 7(4), 100-107.
• Guzeller, C. O. and Akin A. (2014) Relationship between ICT variables and math achievement based on PISA 2006 database: international evidence. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13, 184-192.
• Hennessy, S., Ruthven, K., and Brindley, S. (2005). Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: commitment, constraints, caution and change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(2), 155-192.
• Honey, M., Culp, K. M., and Spielvogel, R. (1999). Critical issue: Using technology to improve student achievement. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED489521.pdf.
• Karpati, A. (2004). Promoting Equity Through ICT in Education: Projects, Problems, Prospects, Budapest. Hungarian Ministry of Education and OECD, Budapest. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/edu/research/31558662.pdf.
• Kurland, D. M. and Kurland, L. C. (1987). Computer applications in education: A historical overview. Annual review of computer science, 2(1), 317-358.
• Kubiatko, M. and Vlckova, K. (2010). The relationship between ICT use and science knowledge for CZECH students: a secondary analysis of PISA 2006. International Journal of Science and Math Education, 8, 523-543.
• Lee, V. E. (2000). Using hierarchical linear modeling to study social contexts: the case of school effects. Educational Psychologist, 35(2), 125-141.
• Lee, Y. H. and Wu, J. Y. (2012). The effect of individual differences in the inner and outer states of ICT on engagement in online reading activities and PISA 2009 reading literacy: exploring the relationship between the old and new reading literacy. Learning and Individual Differences, 22,336-342.
• Lei, J. and Zhao, Y. (2007). Technology uses and student achievement: a longitudinal study. Computers and Education, 49(2), 284-296.
• Li, Q. and Ma, X. (2010). A meta-analysis of the effects of computer technology on school students’ math learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 215-243.
• Liu, O. L. and Wilson, M. (2009). Gender differences in large-scale math assessments: PISA trend 2000 and 2003. Applied Measurement in Education, 22(2), 164-184.
• Livingstone, S. (2007). Strategies of parental regulation in the media-rich home. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(2), 920-941.
• Luu, K. and Freeman, J. G. (2010). An analysis of the relationship between information and communication technology (ICT) and scientific literacy in Canada and Australia. Computers and Education, 56, 1072-1082.
• Martinez, S. and Guzman, S. (2013). Gender and Racial/ethnic differences in self-reported levels of engagement in high school math and science courses. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Science, 35(3), 407-427.
• McMahon, G., Yeo, S., and Williams, M. (2011). Making a difference: student perceptions of Elearning blended with traditional teaching methods. In World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, 1, 759-764.
• Mido, C. and Sunha, K. (2009). Computer access and computer use for science performance or racial and linguistic minority students. Journal of Education Computing and Research, 40 (4), 469–501.
• Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA). (2007). National Assessment Program--ICT Literacy Years 6 and 10 Report 2005. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu.au/verve/_resources/2005_ICTL_Public_Report_file_main.pdf.
• Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: civic engagement, information poverty, and the Internet worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
• Notten, N. and Kraaykamp, G. (2009). Home media and science performance: a cross-national study. Educational Research and Evaluation, 15,367-384.
• OECD. (2003). PISA 2000: literacy skills for the world of tomorrow: further results from PISA 2000. Pairs: OECD Publications.
• OECD. (2004).PISA 2003: learning for tomorrow’s world: first results from PISA 2003. Pairs: OECD Publications.
• OECD. (2007). PISA 2006: Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World, Vol. I: Analysis. Paris: OECD Publications.
• OECD. (2007). Equally prepared for life? How 15-year-old boys and girls perform in school. Pairs: OECD Publications.
• OECD. (2010). PISA 2009 results: what students know and can do – student performance in reading, mathematics and science, Vol. I. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264091450-en.
• OECD. (2011). PISA 2009 results: students on line: digital technologies and performance, Vol. VI. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264112995-en.
• OECD. (2012). PISA 2009 technical report. Pairs: OECD Publications. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264167872-en.
• OECD. (2014).PISA 2012 results: what students know and can do – student performance in mathematics, reading and science, Vol. I. (Revised edition). Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264201118-en.
• Oliver, R., and Towers, S. (2000). Benchmarking ICT literacy in tertiary learning settings. In Learning to choose: Choosing to learn. Paper presented at the 17th Annual ASCILITE Conference.
• Ong, C. S. and Lai, J. Y. (2006}. Gender differences in perceptions and relationships among dominants of e-learning acceptance. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(5), 816-829.
• Papanastasiou, E. (2002}. Factors that differentiate mathematics’ students in Cyprus, Hong Kong, and the USA. Educational Research and Evaluation, 8, 129-146.
• Papanastasiou, E.C., Zembylas, M., and Vrasidas, C. (2003). Can computer use hurt science achievement? The USA results from PISA. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12, 325-332.
• Papanastasiou, E. C. and Ferdig, R. E. (2006). Computer use and mathematic literacy: an analysis of existing and potential relationships. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 25 (4), 361-371.
• Pea, R. D. (1993). Practices of distributed intelligences and design for education. In G. Solomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 47-87.
• Ponzo, M. (2010). Does the Way in which Students Use Computers Matter for their Performance? Munich Personal RePEc Archive Paper 25483, University Library of Munich. Retrieve from http://mpra.ub.unimuenchen.de/25483/1/MPRA_paper_25483.pdf.
• Ravitz, J., Mergendoller, J. and Rush, W. (2002). Cautionary tales about correlations between student computer use and academic achievement. Paper presented at annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA.
• Rindermann, H. (2000). Relevance of education and intelligence for the political development of nations: democracy, rule of law and political liberty. Intelligence, 36(4), 306-322.
• Song, H.D., and Kang, T. (2012). Evaluating the impacts of ICT use: a multi-level analysis with hierarchical linear modeling. The Turkish online journal of educational technology. 11(4), 132-140.
• Spiezia, V. (2010). Does computer use increase educational achievements? Student-level evidence from the OECD PISA survey. OECD Economic Studies (Volume 2010). Retrieve from http://www1.oecd.org/eco/labour/49849896.pdf.
• Raudenbush, S. W. and Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical Linear Models: applications and data analysis methods. Second edition. Chicago.
• Subrahmanyam, K., Kraut, R. E., Greenfield, P. M., and Gross, E. F. (2000). The impact of home computer use on children's activities and development. The Future of Children, 123-144.
• Vanderlinde,R., Aesaert,K., and Braak,J.. (2014). Institutionalised ICT use in primary education: a multilevel analysis. Computers and Education, 72, 1-10.
• Vigdor, J. L., and Ladd, H. F. (2010). Scaling the digital divide: Home computer technology and student achievement. National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieve from http://www.nber.org/papers/w16078.
• Wainer, J., Dwyer, T., Dutra, R. S., Covic, A., Magalhaes, V. B., Ferreira, L. R. R., Pimenta, V. A., and Claudio, K. (2008). Too much computer and internet use is bad for your grades, especially if you are young and poor: results from the 2001 Brazilian SAEB. Computers and Education, 51(4),1417-1429.
• Willms, J. D. and Smith, T. M. (2005). A Manual for Conducting Analyses with Data from TIMSS and PISA. Montreal, PQ: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization Institute for Statistics (UIS).
• Wittwer, J. and Senkbeil, M. (2008). Is students’ computer use at home related to their mathematical performance at school? Computers and Education, 50, 1558-1571.
• Woods-McConney, A., Oliver, M. C., McConney, A., Schibeci, R. and Maor, D. (2014). Science Engagement and Literacy: A retrospective analysis for students in Canada and Australia, International Journal of Science Education, 36(10), 1588-1608.
• Young, K.A. (2005). Young, competent Internet-users: a theory-based profile. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
• Young, K.A. (2008). Toward a model for the study of children’s informal Internet use. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 173-184.
• Zhong, Z. H. 2010. From access to usage: the divide of self-reported digital skills among adolescents. Computers and Education, 56(3), 736-746.
• Zhou, L., Griffin-Shirley, N., Kelley, P., Banda, D. R., Lan, W. Y., Parker, A. T., and Smith, D. W. (2012). The Relationship Between Computer and Internet Use and Performance on Standardized Tests by Secondary School Students with Visual Impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 106(10), 609-621.
• Ziya, E., Dogan, N., and Kelecioglu, H. (2010). What is the predict level of which computer using skills measured in PISA for achievement in math. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9, 185-191.

APA

Zhang, D., & Liu, L. (2016). How Does ICT Use Influence Students’ Achievements in Math and Science Over Time? Evidence from PISA 2000 to 2012. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(9), 2431-2449. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1297a

Vancouver

Zhang D, Liu L. How Does ICT Use Influence Students’ Achievements in Math and Science Over Time? Evidence from PISA 2000 to 2012. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2016;12(9):2431-49. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1297a

AMA

Zhang D, Liu L. How Does ICT Use Influence Students’ Achievements in Math and Science Over Time? Evidence from PISA 2000 to 2012. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2016;12(9), 2431-2449. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1297a

Chicago

Zhang, Danhui, and Luman Liu. "How Does ICT Use Influence Students’ Achievements in Math and Science Over Time? Evidence from PISA 2000 to 2012". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2016 12 no. 9 (2016): 2431-2449. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1297a

Harvard

Zhang, D., and Liu, L. (2016). How Does ICT Use Influence Students’ Achievements in Math and Science Over Time? Evidence from PISA 2000 to 2012. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(9), pp. 2431-2449. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1297a

MLA

Zhang, Danhui et al. "How Does ICT Use Influence Students’ Achievements in Math and Science Over Time? Evidence from PISA 2000 to 2012". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 12, no. 9, 2016, pp. 2431-2449. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1297a