In their own words: Reasons underlying the achievement striving of students in schools.

By analyzing the open-ended reasons for studying generated by 3 different groups of Korean middle school students, we aimed to provide partial answers to current issues in achievement goal research that are difficult to resolve solely with the use of survey ratings. We categorized student responses using the achievement goal frameworks of Midgley et al. (2000), Elliot and McGregor (2001), and Grant and Dweck (2003), as well as the social–academic goal framework of Dowson and McInerney (2003). The responses gained from interviews with the students (Study 2) supported our categorization. Grant and Dweck’s normative (Study 1) and outcome goals (Study 2) and Midgley et al.’s performance-approach goals (Study 3) appeared most frequently when competence-oriented responses were considered, while Dowson and McInerney’s social status goals were the most common for noncompetence responses. Grant and Dweck’s framework as a whole accounted for the largest proportion of competence-oriented responses. However, when present-oriented achievement goals were analyzed independently, Midgley et al.’s mastery goals (Grant and Dweck’s learning goals) accounted for the overwhelming majority of student responses. Grant and Dweck’s ability validation goals were also especially prominent among students subjected to ability grouping (Study 3), demonstrating the effect of the immediate learning environment on the types of achievement goals that students pursue. Elliot and McGregor’s mastery-avoidance goals were rare regardless of whether all achievement goals or only those in the immediate classroom context were examined. A majority of students also pursued only a single goal from within Elliot and McGregor’s 2 × 2 framework. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)