THE WRONG WAY TO PLAN FOR THE FUTURE

O

We all know that thinking ahead is the only way to succeed in life. But a ton of new research shows that the more you think about future goals and events, the more mistakes you're likely to make. So how can you make forward-looking plans in a way that maximizes your chances of winning out?

We talked to the leading psychologists in the field and reviewed the research, to find out the wrong way — and the right way — to plan ahead.

All images by FuturePresent on Flickr.

According to the latest research, humans have a few problems when we think about our future goals. First of all, we tend to overestimate how much we'll be able to get done in a particular time period. Second, we overstate how much our willpower will help us achieve our goals, because we think our will is all powerful when it comes to the future. And finally, the further we think into the future, the less we think concretely. All three of these things can lead to failure. However, there are some work-arounds that may make you more likely to make realistic plans.

The Trouble With Looking Forward

You absolutely have to think about the future, or you're screwed. As Harvard psychology professor Daniel Gilbert tells io9, "Anyone who doesn't think that thinking about the future is important and useful should give away their retirement savings and subsist on ice cream." Things like "401k plans and flossing" are proof that thinking about the future is a useful behavior, says Gilbert.

But there are a few problems that can arise when you're thinking of the future:

1) There's the "planning fallacy," which has been written about a lot. AsJennifer Whitson, a professor of Management at University of Texas, Austin explains it, this theory says that "people generally think they can accomplish more in a certain period of time than they actually can." And it's also possible, says Whitson, that the planning fallacy may intensify the further into the future you're planning ahead.

2) But also, some new not-yet-published research by Cornell University's Thomas Gilovich and Erik Helzer shows that the more you think about the future, the less clearly you're likely to be thinking.

In particular, there's the study called "Whatever is willed will be," which shows that people tend to overstate how effective their willpower will be in the future. Helzer and Gilovich did a whopping seven studies to show that people "consider the will to be a more potent determinant of future events than events that happened in the past."

For example, in one study, they asked people about two girls who have a chemistry test coming up. Allie got a B+ on her last test, while Carolyn got a B-. And the participants were told that Allie has an aptitude for chemistry and enjoys her science classes. Meanwhile, they were told that Carolyn "is known among her friends to have a very strong will; when she sets her mind to something she has been able to surpass the goals she sets for herself." If they had to bet $5 on which girl would do better on the next test, they were more likely to bet on the girl with the strong will than the girl with the aptitude for chemistry.

There's plenty more — other studies they did found that people generally just thought willpower was a stronger force in the future than in the past. In other words, even if your willpower totally failed you in the past, it was bound to succeed in the future. Also, in other research, Gilovich and Helzer show that people think of the past as being more rigid and dense than the future, which is more vague and open-ended. They choose darker colors for the past, when doing a color coded timeline, and lighter colors for the future.

To me, the crux of the issue is that the will is not actually more potent in the future, it just seems that way. This means that the future will seem more controllable and more amenable to shaping than it actually is (and than it actually was in the past), and my guess is that this gap is going to lead to performance decrements, rather than improvements. If people overestimate the amount of willful control that is present in the future, they're likely to underestimate (and not plan for) other external impediments that could limit their future attempts.

Other research (PDF) shows that people place more value on events in the future than events in the past — even if you don't yet know the outcome of those past events. This could lead people to work harder the more they focus on their future goals — or, says Helzer, it might just make you think you'll work harder than you did in the past.

3) And then finally, there's Construal Level Theory, which shows that the further away something is (either in space, or in time) the more abstract it appears. So if you're thinking about a goal that's a few years ahead, you can easily fall into woolly thinking, instead of focusing on the concrete steps that will allow you to get there, says Whitson.

Adds Cornell University Psychology Professor David Pizarro:

We seem to think of events that are close-in-time very differently than those that are further away. In short, things that are close in time (or physical space) are seen as more concrete, and we tend to focus more on the details rather than on the 'big picture'. Things that are further away are viewed as more abstract, and we focus more on the generalities involved.

When we think about an event in the near future, says Pizarro, we focus on the "how" aspects — like if you're traveling to a conference tomorrow, you think about what you're going to wear, how you're getting to the airport, how early you have to get up, and so on. But if you're thinking about going to a conference next year, you think about the importance of sharing your ideas, how meeting all those people will help your career, and perhaps the idea that travel is good for the soul.

The research on Construal Level Theory shows "that we focus more on our broad goals and priorities when thinking about the future, and that we make better decisions with distance. But we also lose sight of details, and commit ourselves to more than we think we should have," Pizarro tells io9.

The Right Way to Make Plans

Harvard's Gilbert says that there are right and wrong ways to think about the future — and the difference between the two can mean the difference between success and failure in planning. In a nutshell, you have to resist your tendency to think about the future in more abstract and optimistic terms — and maybe keep one eye on the mistakes of the past.

Think about your friends instead of yourself
In another recent research paper, Helzer and David Dunning found that "peer prediction" is more accurate than "self-prediction." In other words, you're likelier to be accurate in estimating how well your friends will succeed than you are at estimating your own performance. So if you want to form a realistic sense of whether you can count on achieving Steps A, B and C in your plan, imagine you're thinking about a friend rather than yourself. Another strategy: Ask yourself, "How would someone else expect me to perform at this?" You can even ask a friend for advice about whether you should expect to be able to reach a particular goal.

These sorts of questions can be important in many cases — like if you're a student trying to decide whether to drop a course before the deadline, or a CEO promising to ship a product by a particular deadline.

Think about the past rather than the future
In that same paper, Helzer and Dunning write:

There are many reasons to use past behavior as an indicator of future action and achievement. The overarching reason is that past behavior is a product of a number of causal variables that sum up to produce it — and that suite of causal variables in the same proportion is likely to be in play for any future behavior in a similar context.

In other words, things that went wrong in the past are likely to go wrong in the future, as well. We just tend to think of the future in more rosy terms. (The whole research paper is well worth reading, especially the discussion section, which is basically a how-to for people trying to make plans they can realistically achieve.)

Focus on concrete details
There's a ton of research on the subject of "Implementation Intentions," which is basically the science of making plans that are focused on contingencies and detailed steps, rather than wishful thinking. Explains Helzer:

I think the concreteness of the plan matters a lot. The idea from the implementation intentions literature is to set up if-thens, so that you have concrete action plans to enact when, as you say, unexpected contingencies creep up. It's also an attempt to take the thinking out of the whole procedure — if you can just "automatize" what you will do in response to distractions or temptations, then you don't even have to rely upon willpower to keep you focused on the goal.

Take advantage of the good parts of abstract thinking
And finally, you can take your tendency to think about the future in abstract terms, and use it to your advantage. Sure, this can lead to wishful thinking — but it can also make you more likely to make worthwhile sacrifices. There's a ton of research by Ohio State University's Kentaro Fujita, showing that the kind of abstract thinking that Construal Level Theory talks about can be helpful — if it leads to a preference for deferred gratification instead of instant gratification.

In other words, you can use this tendency towards more vague thought about the future to help yourself focus on future rewards instead of immediate ones.

Besides the focus on deferred gratification, using abstract thought "leads to decreased preferences for immediate over delayed outcomes, greater physical endurance, stronger intentions to exert self-control, and less positive evaluations of temptations that undermine self-control," Cornell University's Jun Fukukura tells io9. Also, other research shows that the further in the future your goal is, the more likely you are to find reasons to exercise self-control.

So if you focus your future thought on controlling your present behavior, and focus on future needs instead of current wants, you can take your innate tendency to loose thinking about the future and turn it to your advantage, says Fukukura.

THE GREAT BOOK ROBBERY

THE SECRET OF CATNIP

Catnip drive felines crazy, causing them to roll around on the floor and paw at invisible birds flying in their vicinity, but why?

Humans have used catnip for recreational purposes, as smoking the substance produces some interesting effects. How does catnip affect felines and why does it cause such wild responses? Are cat owners willfully doping their pets?

Catnip is another name for the herb Nepeta cataria, arelative of oregano and spearmint. Nepeta cataria is a pretty common plant, oftenfound along highways and railroads in North America. Don't feed your cat anyNepeta cataria you might find along the side of the road, as it could contain an array of pesticides or harmful chemicals left over from railway construction likecreosote.

The active molecule in Nepeta cataria is nepetalactone, which is believed to mimic a cat pheromone. Nepetalactone binds to a cat's olfactory receptors to produce catnip's unique response.

Owner's descriptions of the effects of catnip on their pets range from arousal toeuphoria to sedation, with some cats drooling during exposure. One veterinariansuggested that the moans cats make while exposed to catnip are the result of chemically induced hallucinations. If a human exhibited these signs, we would likely be concerned, but most cat owners are comfortable with their feline's recreational drug problem.

Leaves from Nepeta cataria or nepetalactone oil extracts are used by cat owners to provoke their pets. Owners can crushNepeta cataria to release the attractant that lies within bulbs of the herb or they can buy toys infused with an extract of the herb. Since the pheromone mimic affects the olfactory receptors, cats don't achieve any positive results from eating catnip. Consumption of the buds sends the active ingredient down the digestive tract, where it is degraded. A little less than half of cats are not attracted to catnip at all, with genetics playing a role in determining a cat's interest in the herb. Catnip, in large enough quantities, will also work as an attractant for large cats like lions and tigers.

Click to viewEuropeans in the 1400s regularly drank teas made from catnip, with the herb earning a medicinalapplication for treatment of colic and flatulence.Nepeta cataria is a member of the mint family, with tea brewed that possesses a flavor and smell similar to mint tea.

Smoking catnip became popular as an alternative to marijuana in the 1960s. When the herb is smoked, it produces a low level, legal high complete withaudio/visual hallucinations and a relaxed feeling at a fraction of the cost. Concentrated doses of Nepeta cataria brewed as a tea can also produce a mild, short-term sedative effect in humans.

While catnip serves no real purpose other than allowing an owner to watch his or her cat go bonkers, there is no evidence that causes harms to cats either. If your pet is a little too sedate, toss it some catnip and liven things up.

Top image courtesy of Knibitz/DeviantArt. Additional image courtesy ofrelictome/DeviantArt and video of tigers under the influence of catnip courtesy of Big Cat Rescue. Sources linked within the article.

BLIND DATE

MOST EXPENSIVE PAINTINGS SOLD

20 Most Expensive Paintings Ever Sold

Hundreds of thousands even millions of dollars are spent every year by art patrons eager to own the world’s most sought-after paintings.Find out a little more about this shortlist of Picasso’s, Van Gogh’s and more works from famous artists who still command the highest prices.

Pablo Picasso – Femme aux Bras Croisés (Woman with Folded Arms), 1902
Sold for $55 million in 2000


Vincent van Gogh – A Wheatfield with Cypresses, 1889
Sold for $57 million in 1993


Kazimir Malevich – Suprematist Composition, 1916
Sold for $60 million in 2008


Paul Cézanne – Rideau, Cruchon et Compotier, 1894
Sold for $60.5 million in 1999


Willem de Kooning – Police Gazette, 1955
Sold for $63.5 in 2006


Vincent van Gogh – Portrait de l’Artiste Sans Barbe (Self-portrait without beard), 1889
Sold for $71.5 million in 1998


Andy Warhol – Green Car Crash, 1963
Sold for $71.7 million in 2007


Mark Rothko –White Center (Yellow, Pink and Lavender on Rose), 1950
Sold for $72.8 million in 2007


Peter Paul Rubens – Massacre of the Innocents, 1611
Sold for $76.7 million in 2002


Pierre-Auguste Renoir – Bal au Moulin de la Galette, Montmartre (Dance at Le moulin de la Galette), 1876
Sold for $78.1 million in 1990


Jasper Johns – False Start, 1959
Sold for $80 million in 2006


Claude Monet – Le Bassin Aux Nymphéas (Water Lily Pond), 1919
Sold for $80.5 million in 2008


Vincent van Gogh – Portrait of Dr. Gachet, 1890
Sold for $82.5 million in 1990


Francis Bacon – Triptych, 1976
Sold for $86.3 million in 2008


Gustav Klimt – Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer II, 1912
Sold for $87.9 million in 2006


Pablo Picasso – Dora Maar au Chat (Dora Maar with Cat), 1941
Sold for $95.2 in 2006


Pablo Picasso – Garçon à la Pipe (Boy with a Pipe), 1905
Sold for $104.2 million in 2004


Gustav Klimt – Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I, 1907
Sold for $135 million in 2006


Willem de Kooning – Woman III, 1953
Sold for $137.5 million in 2006


Jackson Pollock – No. 5, 1948
Sold for $140 million in 2006

MONOLOGUE 24

Lia Scott Price – A More Psychotic Level

One of the hottest new trends in horror finds noted authors adapting their books to the medium of comics. Best-sellers like Stephen King, Clive Barker and Laurell K. Hamilton have all seen their work transformed into four-color fear. But the fun isn't strictly limited to household names.

The latest writer to see her scary stories get the graphic novel treatment is indie horror scribe Lia Scott Price. Known by a devoted cult following for her vampire trilogy novel, The Guardian, Revenant, and Dominion, Price has recently jumped to the realm of comic books with a series called Vampire Guardian Angels™.

Like the best horror, Price's work takes a fresh look at a familiar topic. But what sets her writing apart is its use of a universally beloved, sacred symbol as a jumping off point for terror.

"I turned our everyday guardian angels into vicious vampires," Price told me recently. "In the series, guardian angels from Heaven have become vampires who kill people who pray to them for help. But of course, humans and 'good' angels work together to stop them — classic 'good vs. evil.'"

Well, perhaps not "classic" good vs. evil. What provoked this violent new spin on one of contemporary society's most cherished archetypes? "I was in a church one time listening to a sermon about how guardian angels were there to protect us," she said, "and my first thought was, 'What if they harmed us instead?' That's what inspired me to write the novel. From then on, it was a 'what if' game: What if guardian angels were serial killers? What if they were sick of hearing our prayers? What if they killed us instead? By the second novel, it was 'What if they were vampires?' Then it all went downhill from there."

Insubordinate angels are not unusual — from the Bible to The Prophecy, popular culture is full of holy messengers with bad attitudes. But, I pointed out, the concept of angels as serial killers is definitely fresh territory. Price smiled. "My idea was to portray what a guardian angel was really thinking. I mean, if it was your job to answer millions of prayers a day, or to watch over some humans who may do stupid, dumb things that they expect you to save them from, or to act as a sort of Heaven Hotline/guardian angel customer service where you constantly had to solve people's problems, I bet you would eventually snap and go ape-crap ballistic.

"So I wrote from the standpoint of 'what were they really thinking/feeling/wanting?' Did they feel any sense of resentment toward humans? Do they want to quit their jobs? How far would they go to shut us up? What would they do if they had freedom and absolute power? It's 'guardian angel turned psycho' time," she laughed. "And adding the vampire element makes them even more fucked up."

Because religion is such a hot button issue these days, one would think this depraved depiction of God's ministering spirits might cause, at the very least, a certain amount of outrage. No so, says Price. "People have been overwhelmingly supportive because I think they want to see a unique, fresh take on the vampire image and welcome something entirely new and original.

"Horror is about stretching the imagination," she said. "I'm sure it's rather disturbing to some people to see a guardian angel become a serial killer and a vampire, especially if I'm writing about something that kills you when you pray. But actually, the reaction has ranged from fascination to 'that's really interesting.'"

It helps that Price is not just out to shock and offend. While her tales are brutal, there is serious thought behind them. "Just because I'm messing with the pop-culture image of a guardian angel doesn't mean I'm condemning it or being disrespectful. I'm questioning why we rely so much on a supernatural entity to save us. It's an alternate view to something supernatural.

"We put so much blind faith in a higher power to help us," Price continued, "and we don't even know what it is we are summoning. That's the whole point of my books and films. Angelic rebellion is nothing new, but I've just taken it to another, more psychotic level."

The world Price has created seems particularly cinematic, so it comes as no surprise her characters and stories were first conceived as screenplays. While taking acting classes, Price began writing scenes to perform with classmates. As she watched her words being brought to life, she was inspired to develop the scenes into stories, which begat chapters, which begat the volume of novellas, The Guardian, Revenant, and Dominion.

After the book's success, it seemed natural to double back to the project's roots and make films based on the material. So, Price taught herself filmmaking and created a series of low-budget shorts based on characters and scenes from the trilogy.

"My filming style is influenced by The X-Files and The Twilight Zone," Price said. "I prefer something more stylistic with not too much splatter, more slow-paced and creepy. I wanted to concentrate more on the acting and psychological impact of my stories rather than just becoming another slasher film. I like to be different and experimental. I want to see if I can portray terror in a more subdued, yet emotional way. It's the characters and the message of my films that should have the spotlight."

Ever curious, once she'd tackled film, Price decided to jump into the medium of comics. "I use the films, and of course the comic books, mainly as a promotional tool for my characters and books, to introduce people to my works. I think it's a more interesting and exciting way of 'advertising.'

"That said, I've always wanted to see my Vampire Guardian Angels as comic book characters. I've already turned the novel into films, and comic books were the next logical step. The purpose was to bring the novel and the characters to life through all forms of visual imagery. It's amazing to see that in a comic book format. And it makes them look badass too."

Price's new creator-owned comic book series, called Vampire Guardian Angels, features artist Andrew Setter and colorist/letterer Chad Hammontree, and will be a fully illustrated version of the original novels, consisting of three comics from each book in the trilogy.

The colorful world of comic books has advantages that are exciting to the author. "I definitely love the creative freedom that comics have," she said. "I love seeing my characters drawn just the way I envisioned them and the settings in the book come to life around them. To me, that has a much greater impact than just words on paper. I feel like one can relate to the characters and story more if they can see more of a visual image. You can portray a lot more visually — action, horror, emotion — and show way much more than what a novel can. You're not limited to just words anymore.

Though it sounds like Price could use a vacation, she hasn't slowed down. Actually, she has just wrapped filming her next short film, titled PRA/EY. "The director/cinematographer is Ray Rodriguez, and it stars me, Jennifer Cannon and Brandon Murphy Barnes.

"[PRA/EY is] based on some combined chapters from my trilogy, but uses the same main character. In the film, I play a mental patient who's confined to a hospital and who tries to convince a psychiatrist not to pray to a guardian angel, and warns her of what would happen if she does. We're now in editing, and the film should be released on DVD this year."

So there you have it. Books, films, comics — I'm not sure what's left for Price to conquer, but I'm sure whatever it is, it's already in her sights. For more information on all things Lia Scott Price, check out her official website (liascottprice.com/).

And beware to whom you pray. You never know who's listenin

Lia Scott Price, Horror/Vampire Author and Film Producer
Creator of Serial Killer and Vampire Guardian Angels^TM

Lia Scott Price's Characters are Guardian Angels with Fangs, and Issues.

Serial Killer and Vampire Guardian Angels^TM, created by Lia Scott Price, are characters in her Books and Films. She's turned Guardian Angels into a new type of Serial Killer, and a new breed of Vampire. If you pray for help to a Guardian Angel, they kill you. Because they are sick and tired of answering your prayers and of protecting humans. That's pretty much it in a nutshell. So don't whine to a Guardian Angel. Do you really know who you're praying to?

What the hell are they?They are Guardian Angels that have become vicious Serial Killers and Vampires. Their victims are people who pray for help to them.

Can they be killed?Not by traditional vampire-killing methods. Holy water, crucifixes (they're "holy" beings, you know), stakes through the heart, or sunlight won't kill them, unfortunately.

How do they attack humans?They'll attack you only if you pray to them. Your desperation summons them. They cut you up with sharp weapons: swords, knives, etc. They prefer to slice and drink. Less struggling, less work. No need to bite necks.

So what WILL kill them?Only another Guardian who has turned "back to good".

Why Guardian Angels?Why not? Do you really know what they are? They could really be evil....and they really really hate us.

How did Lia come up with her characters?She challenges the popular belief that Guardian Angels are good protectors: "What if they aren't good? Why not turn them into something else unexpected and evil...like a Serial Killer....and a Vampire?"

Welcome to her world

BOOKS THAT SCARRED US FOR LIFE

53

Today is the 73rd birthday of YA staple Gary Paulsen, the author of over 200 novels, includingBrian’s Saga (read: Hatchet and its ensuing sequels).  Hatchet is one of those books it seems like just about everyone we know has read, and just about everyone we know (ahem, including us) was at least a little bit scarred by it — or at the very least, picked up some important survival skills. So as a tribute to the author of this ubiquitous novel, and for a fun trip down memory lane, we’ve compiled a list of YA books that gave us some serious emotional wounds that we may or may not still be nursing a little bit. Click through to check out our list of YA books that totally scarred us for life, and let us know which ones still keep you up at night in the comments.

Hatchet, Gary Paulsen

In this novel, Brian’s plane crashes, leaving him alone in the wilderness with only his hatchet to rely on, staying alive on his wits and this one archaic tool. Okay, we learned some survival skills, but we can’t even bring hatchets on planes anymore. We can’t even bring Swiss army knives! We bought a Swiss army knife after reading this book and then realized it totally wouldn’t help in a plane crash situation! This book just reinforced our feeling that we would probably die if stranded in the wilderness for 54 days. Sigh.

Where the Red Fern Grows, Wilson Rawls

Look, as far as we’re concerned, this book is not appropriate for children. Your humble author read it in the third grade, when the teachers realized I was bored stiff with the picture books they were prescribing to the rest of the class. I fell out of my chair crying. Spoiler alert, but at the end, the one dog dies, and then the other dog dies of sadness. That is just the worst thing I had ever heard. It still might be.

The Giver, Lois Lowry

The ending of this book has been plaguing us for oh, almost two decades now. The premise is startling enough — a world without color, emotion, or any free will — and we still think of the stern lesson in “language precision” Jonas received whenever we whine that we’re “starving,” but the ending is what keeps us up at night. The way we see it, there are only two possibilities: either Jonas finds the non-dystopian world of his dreams, filled with soft light and warm food, or it’s a death hallucination. Sadly, we sort of think it’s the latter.

Bridge to Terabithia, Katherine Paterson

It’s bad enough when animals die in books, but this was probably the first book we read where a kid — a kid our age — died too. Plus, Paterson took so much care to make her awesome before she killed her off. Lesson learned: stay away from rope swings at all costs. Especially if you’re an atheist.

Logan’s Run, William F. Nolan and George Clayton Johnson

Another book centered around a futuristic dystopian society, this one ageist to the point where they have it all set up so you happily go to your death as soon as you hit age 21 and the little shiny crystal in your hand turns black.  Needless to say, this book has only gotten more profound (well, sort of) as we’ve gotten older, but we remember being horrified by it even at a young age, examining our palms and eyeing our parents and teachers with mistrust whenever they asked us to go anywhere. We would not be summarily executed on our birthdays. No, sir.

Lizard Music, Daniel Pinkwater

Pinkwater is pretty much the weirdest, and your intrepid author’s father enjoyed pressing his books into her hands just to see what faces she’d make. In this one, Victor, home alone for two weeks, sees some giant lizards playing in a band on late-night TV. Turns out no one knows anything about them except the Chicken Man, who leads Victor on a absurd, hilarious, wild lizard chase to an invisible island. This had us both hooked on and terrified of television for years.

The Golden Compass, Philip Pullman

So let’s get this straight: there is a woman kidnapping children to do sick experiments on them — separating them from their souls, essentially — and then we find out it’s our heroine’s mom? That’s just not right. Also, we want our own personal daemons, stat. No, that teddy bear won’t do, Mom. What is this, more torture?

The Chronicles of Narnia, C.S. Lewis

We probably don’t have to explain to you why these books were so scarring, but let’s put it this way: more than one of our friends has a story about how, when she finished the final book, she fell to the ground crying, wailing that she had to die, or she’d never get to Narnia. Sure, we don’t think that anymore (we get it, it’s a Christian allegory), but you can’t deny it’s a pretty messed up message to send to a kid.

Lord of the Flies, William Golding

Like everyone else (probably), this book had looking at our classmates with distrust when we read it in school. Ever since we’ve been plagued by the question — what would we do? Would our animal instincts take over? Would we hunt pigs? Would we hunt Piggy? We just don’t know, but this book terrified us.

White Fang, Jack London

New Girl’s Schmidt isn’t the only one whose life choices have been informed by the end of London’s classic. True, we’ve never personally “White Fanged” anyone, but we can’t say we’ve never thought about it. It’s kill or be killed, after all.

GRADUATION DAY

3

It’s graduation season, folks! Will you be donning a hard-earned tassel? Or cheering from the audience? Or, perhaps, sitting on the Internet, avoiding the notoriously long ceremonies altogether? If that’s the case, we can guarantee you wouldn’t want to skip a graduation if Jay-Z or James Franco were involved (although we’re pretty sure the latter has earned degrees from about 60 percent of all schools at this point, so there’s a good chance he’ll be at your local university’s ceremony). Anyway, after the jump, we’ve gathered 9 fun photos of celebrities in caps and gowns to celebrate the season.

Here’s a baby Jay-Z after graduating from elementary school. [Image via]

In 1960, Janis Joplin graduated from Thomas Jefferson High School in Port Arthur, Texas. [Image via]

Check out Elizabeth Taylor looking ever so glamorous in her graduation photo from University High School in Los Angeles. [Image via]

Earlier this month, Shaquille O’Neal graduated from Barry University with a doctorate in education. Congratulations, Dr. Shaq! [Image via]

In 1995, Jimmy Fallon dropped out of College of Saint Rose in Albany, NY one semester before graduating. In 2009, the Late Night host completed his degree in communications. [Image via]

Here we have James Franco graduating from NYU in 2011. He’s also conquered UCLA, Columbia University, Brooklyn College, and Rhode Island School of Design. Heck, he probably enrolled in another school in the time it’s taken us to type this. James Franco — coming soon to a college near you. [via]

This photo was taken after Michelle Obama’s graduation from Princeton. Bring that hair back! [Image via]

Here we have Dakota Fanning graduating from Campbell Hall High School, the same school as the Olsen twins, in 2011. [Image via]

Orlando Bloom received an honorary degree from the University of Kent in 2010. [Image via]