Achievement goal theory and thus, the empirical measures stemming from the research, are currently divided on two conceptual approaches, namely the reason versus aims-based models of achievement goals. The factor structure and predictive utility of goal constructs from the Patterns of Adaptive Learning Strategies (PALS) and the latest two versions of the Achievement Goal Questionnaire (AGQ-R; 3x2 AGQ) were simultaneously examined among a sample of high school females. Findings highlight the validity and divergence of both theoretical models. The 2x2 framework was supported across all confirmatory factor analyses as having the best model fit whereas a three-goal framework consisting of performance and mastery goals was supported across exploratory factor analyses. Results also suggest that there was more variability in the operationalization of mastery goals than performance goals across instruments. Finally, results suggest that the goal measures from the PALS predicted a wider range of learning outcomes, and also differentiated across outcomes more than the AGQ goal scales, indicating that the PALS may have greater predictive utility. Implications for promoting a more integrative model of achievement goals are discussed. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]