Smith 1

Savannah Smith
ENG 489H
Honors Thesis
5/8/2015
Students as Interesting Objects or as Interesting Individuals?: Retheorizing Educational
Practices for Young Women in Mansfield Park
1. Starting at the End: Some Modern Approaches to Reading and Learning
In the field of education, there is currently a many-faceted discussion surrounding what
content should be employed in the English Language Arts classroom, in what way, and for what
purpose. There is often a tension between the desire to foster intrinsic motivation in every
student based on individual differences in literacies, ability, and experiences, and those that
believe that there are certain works of literature, types of writing, and classroom activities that
each student must have in order to reach what society deems success. The Common Core State
Standards, now implemented in a majority of the United States, though offering flexibility where
one would seek it, do indicate specific authors explicitly in standards such as, [a]nalyze how an
author draws on and transforms source material in a specific work (e.g., how Shakespeare treats
a theme or topic from Ovid or the Bible or how a later author draws on a play by Shakespeare)
(CCSS. ELA-Literacy. RL. 9-10.10). Although these standards never explicitly state that a
certain written work must be taught, through recommendations, they demonstrate the kind of
cultural capital that some works have over others based on level of complexity, thematic content,
cultural insight, etc. There are those, such as Francine Prose in I Know Why the Caged Bird
Cannot Read, that argue that the novels deemed proper in the educational setting are often
poorly-written, too easy, and oversimplified for the students in ways that are detrimental to their
reading skills. She argues for teachers to use works that foster rigor in reading in the classroom

Smith 2

so that they grow as readers, which for her, is a primary goal of English education. Sherman
Alexie, on the other hand, in Why the Best Books Are Written in Blood, is not concerned with
the rigor of any given novel. He argues that students, especially teenagers, should be allowed
to read books as weaponsin the form of words and ideas-that will help them fight their
monsters. In his view, educators cannot forget the experiences that students have outside of the
classroom when trying to educate within the classroom. Each student as an individual comes
with his or her own monsters, and what students learn within the English Language Arts
setting should apply to their lives in a way that will allow them to grow as people. There are
many facets to the conversation surrounding the role of English Language Arts education and the
reasons for its implementation, but it is clear that there are those that lean more towards
following a norm and those that would argue for individual fulfillment.
Investigations of individual difference in reading are not limited to the realm of
education. In recent years, in my work with the Digital Humanities and Literary Cognition Lab
under the supervision of Professor Natalie Phillips, I have taken part in research that explores the
neuroscience of reading at the level of the individual. This research builds off of an experiment
conducted at Stanford, in which eighteen Ph.D. candidates read the second chapter of Jane
Austens Mansfield Park while in an fMRI scanner, alternating between close reading and
reading for pleasure. After time spent in the scanner, the participants would write close reading
essays based on the sections which they close read within the scanner. In my time at the DHLC, I
have helped to analyze these essays to look for trends among them. Within these essays, subjects
not only broader references to specific moments from Austens text, but quote directly from
memory, along with unintentionally mimicking Austens language. One trend that has been found
among all three of these kinds of references is a remarkable amount of tangible, specific

Smith 3

language being remembered and referenced over more abstract passages from Austens work.
The implications of these findings are not finalized, but the DHLC lab is currently working
through some potential links between attention, memory, and the concreteness and specificity of
language.
A final area of study through which one can investigate reading on an individual level is
through exploring how reading, learning, memory, and attention have been conceptualized in the
past. This can be used as a form of literary analysis that works, rather than attempting to impose
modern psychological views that are contextualized within a modern society to explore
character, theme, and the like, to use views of mind actually concurrent with societal views in a
historical era to investigate these characteristics of a narrative. This analysis can work further to
shed light on what these views of mind actually are, and what the implications of these views
would be on the field. Works of literature can be paired with other primary sources in order to
demonstrate the many (often competing) views of a state of mind that would come up in
discourse at that time, and this can be used as a practice to reflect on modern discourse.
Oftentimes, one finds that the views previously held inform and anticipate those of today.
This essay stems from all three of these areas of study: modern educational theory,
modern theories of cognition, and history of mind, united as a hybrid critical lens, in order to
shed light on how past views of education, focusing primarily on reading, anticipate much of
modern educational debate surrounding the role of individual difference in the classroom and in
learning at large. This research has focused on close analysis of several of Jane Austens works,
including Mansfield Park, Sanditon, and The Watsons, along with other primary texts including
theoretical works on memory, education, and learning by authors such as John Locke, Mary
Wollstonecraft, and Hester Chapone. Mansfield Park (1814) offers a theoretical frame for what

Smith 4

can be seen as Austens views on female education, along with other views that Austen critiques
through satire. Fanny, this novels protagonist, provides the perfect object of comparison along
the lines of class, gender, and different educational frameworks. Fanny is often positioned in
contrast with other female characters that have received different education than she has,
including her cousins the Miss Bertrams when she is a child, and her romantic rival Mary
Crawford when she is a young woman.
Austen opens her novel with this first comparison, in which Fannys aunt Mrs. Norris
asserts that there is a vast deal of difference in memories between the Miss Bertrams and
Fanny, in which Fanny has a complete deficiency because she has not been brought-up with
the same education as her cousins. There are many theorists of education and memory from the
eighteenth century that would refute the idea that one education is proper for all students, or that
the education that these cousins had was the ideal one for strengthening or demonstrating
memory, including Mary Wollstonecraft, Maria Edgeworth, and John Locke. Austen, through the
actions of Fannys cousin Edmund as educator, shows her approval of an education based on
individual needs and interest that fosters internal motivation for the student, which is a view that
aligns with the educational paradigms of many of the era. As a young woman, Fanny is
contrasted with Mary Crawford, a young woman who has grown-up in privilege with the
proper education, but only has interest in that which is light and lively, whereas Fanny
continues to self-educate with reading works that many theorists would support and investigating
nature, another beneficial practice, according to Hester Chapone. While the contrast between
Fanny and the Miss Bertrams shows how a student should affect education, the contrast between
Fanny and Mary Crawford shows the positive and negative effects of education on a person and
a nuanced difference in memory and capacity of attention grounded in interest and disposition.

Smith 5

The society and educational system in which Fanny is positioned in Austens Mansfield
Park is one that is highly structured both among class and gender lines. In the case of women in
the eighteenth century, these two structures are intertwined within the socio-economic system of
marriage, and it strongly influences what type of education is administered to girls. In the words
of Fannys aunt, Mrs. Norris, Give a girl an education, and introduce her properly into the
world, and ten to one but she has the means of settling well, without farther expense to any
body (427). For young women, marriage and settling well are not just encouraged, but a
necessary means of survival, if one does not wish to be an expense. Jean Jacques Rousseau, in
Book V of Emile, or On Education (1762), has a section about women and their education
entitled Sophy, or Woman, in which he details the ideal woman and the logic behind the
education that she receives. In the opinion of Rousseau, too much education for a woman can be
detrimental to her household, for a female wit is a scourge to her husband, her children, her
friends, her servants, to everybody. The girl must have an education of some sort in order to
marry a man of education, however, because it is not fitting for an educated man to choose
a wife who has none, or take her from a class where she cannot be expected to have any
education. This demonstrates how the education of young women is inextricably tied to gender
and class, due to the fact that there are certain classes that are known to not have an education,
but it is outside of the norms for the female gender to be a wit. A learned lady is far worse
than a homely girl, simply brought up, when it comes to potential wives. It is clear that one
educational paradigm for young women promotes them only knowing what is necessary in order
to become a worthy wife of a man of education, which includes being educated simply to
maintain a household, without the danger of becoming a learned lady. This education is only
available to women of a certain class, and it is not the same education that men should receive.

Smith 6

George Chapman, in A Treatise on Education with a Sketch of the Authors Method

(1784), also argues that the purpose of education for young women is to prepare them for being
wives. He however, believes that men and women should receive the same education because
they are partakers of the same nature and endued with the same powers of mind (99).
Whereas Rousseau perhaps believe that men and women have the same powers of mind, since
women can become learned, but sees this as a highly dangerous practice, Chapman sees
women becoming learned as a necessity for a functioning marriage. If women are educated, it
is good preparation for becoming a wife because they are more capable of instructing their
children, and more attentive to their behaviour (99). In both the case of Rousseau and of
Chapman, women are viewed solely as potential wives and mothers, and any education that they
receive should be in service of that role, rather than for any personal interest or growth. These are
a few of the many complex views of education during the eighteenth century, and as shown later,
there are many, especially female theorists such as Mary Wollstonecraft and Stphanie Flicit,
Comtesse de Genlis, that will begin to combat this type of thinking. Austen falls under the
category of educational theorist that emphasizes education as a space for personal growth rather
than for marriage preparation, as will be shown in the exploration of Fanny as a learner at many
stages of her life, beginning in childhood and ending in womanhood.
2. Difference in Memories, Part I: The Female Student and Prescribed Accomplishments
Jane Austens Mansfield Park is a novel centered on the concept of difference. Whether it
is character distinctions of class, gender, age, or even a difference in memories, there is always
some distinction illuminated between Fanny, the protagonist, and the society she finds herself in.
The opening two chapters of this novel often position the young Fanny against her two cousins,
Maria and Louisa Bertram, especially regarding their education and mental capacities. Their

Smith 7

overbearing aunt, Mrs. Norris, is very quick to assert that there is no difference for the
instructor, Miss Lee, between educating two or three young girls to assure the Bertram family
that Fanny will not become a burden. She also, however, repeatedly assures the Miss Bertrams of
their cognitive superiority: that between their cousin and them there is a vast deal of difference
in memories. From the novels start, Austen ironizes to critique the mentality on assuming a
homogenous female student body, subtly constructing the constant generalization of the two
Miss Bertrams, the positioning of the young girls as objects in moments that discuss education,
and the parallel yet illogical use of the term difference when Mrs. Norris contradicts herself
about the education of her nieces. Her critique also becomes apparent when the Bertram sisters
believe that anyone who does not have the same rote background knowledge as them in the
realms of history, geography, geology, and the arts to be stupid, while never truly articulating
the reason why their knowledge is important. Wollstonecraft in two of her famous works, A
Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792) and Thoughts on the Education of Daughters (1787)
warns against educating young women in superficial accomplishments without also provided
more substantial ones. In the contrast between Fanny and her cousins, it seems that Fanny has the
substantial accomplishments in the form of self-knowledge, humility, generosity that the
Miss Bertrams lack. Through these moments from Mansfield Park, Austens educational beliefs
coincide with those of Wollstonecraft through her critiques of empty rote knowledge without
understanding of real-life application.
In the first chapter, Mrs. Norris is the main family member pushing to bring Fanny Price
to Mansfield Park, take her in, and educate her. While convincing Sir Thomas Bertram to take
the young girl instead of her, they discuss the logistics of her education and upbringing. In
regards to educating another young girl, Mrs. Norris assures Sir Thomas that it will be just

Smith 8

the same to Miss Lee, whether she has three girls to teach, or only two-there can be no
difference (428). In this passage, a pattern of irony emerges: though Mrs. Norris pretends to be
able to speak for the tutor, it is the governess, Miss Lee, who is deemed worthy of having a
name. Her pupils are reduced to girls, easily quantified in groups of three or two. Unable
to see these young women as students first, Mrs. Norris reveals their status as inherently
gendered objects of attention, not education. Her declarative statements erase individuality: it
be[ing] just the same for two or three students and there can be no difference, not only
implying a general sameness between girls that extends to education is an undeniable truth, but
claim the force and authority beyond that of the governess to reinforce it.
Austens satire shines through, in the following chapter when, Mrs. Norris blatantly and
unapologetically refutes her own statement about there being no difference. The Miss
Bertrams, are flabbergasted by the fact that Fanny could [only] read, work, and write, even
though she comes from a poor family in which many of the Bertrams educational resources
were unavailable to her and could be taught nothing more. Since Fanny does not have the same
degree of knowledge as her cousins, [think] her prodigiously stupid, and were continually
bringing some fresh report of it in the drawing room (433). The sisters cannot see outside their
own background and capabilities to account for a difference in the funds of knowledge that any
given pupil would have, and as such, everyone either has the same educational background as
them, or is prodigiously stupid. Yet again the reader receives a declaration in absolutes from
Mrs. Norris that comes after such a report from Fannys cousins, this time instilling ideas of
radical and inherent difference:
Very true indeed, my dears, but you are blessed with wonderful memories, and your
poor cousin has probably none at all. There is a vast deal of difference in memories, as
well as in every thing else, and therefore you must make allowance for your cousin, and
pity her deficiency (434).

Smith 9

Here, there is a vast deal of difference, evoking an indefinite and potentially infinite gap
between their memories and Fannys. Difference in this case specifically refers to the
memories of the three girls, implicitly referring to a distinction between their brains capacity
to remember all things, not just a difference in rote memorization. The fact that Fanny is poor has
nothing to do with her lack of this knowledge, but rather is due to some deficiency of her mind.
The two Miss Bertrams have wonderful memories, while Fanny has probably none at all.
While Mrs. Norris does insert the word probably to leave room for Fanny to have some
capacity for remembering and learning, it is clear that she sees memory as more of an all or
nothing attribute of the brain.
The evidence of the wonderful memories that these two sisters have is their knowledge
of the things that Miss Lee has already taught them, such as rote memorization of geography and
different modes of creating art: Dear Mama, only think, my cousin cannot put the map of
Europe together-or my cousin cannot tell the principal rivers in Russia-or she never heard of Asia
Minor-or she does not know the difference between water-colours and crayons! (433). Austen
is satirizing the ideology of an education based on memorizing facts, since the sisters seem not to
be highly concerned with the actual application of such information, and they never explain why
it would be important for Fanny to know these things. The concepts Asia Minor, etc.are
simply what she should know. There is also much irony in the extent of the confusion that these
young Bertram ladies face, for they are not only taking for granted their exposure to a governess
and a more in-depth education, but they are also unaware of the resources necessary for these
subjects (i.e. maps and actual water-colours and crayons). Mrs. Norris reinforces this
mentality that ones experiences do not shape what one has learned, and there are certain things

Smith 10

all people need to know. It depends on an inherent capacity, and the distinction between classes
and levels of intelligence often correlate.
In relation to the current educational system that both Mrs. Norris and the Miss Bertrams
promote and deem the only kind of knowledge, Mary Wollstonecraft harshly critiques the fact
that it leaves the mind empty without an understanding that is cultivated in A Vindication
of the Rights of Women (1792):
No, it is indolence and vanitythe love of pleasure and the love of sway, that will rain
paramount in an empty mind. I say empty emphatically, because the education which
women now receive scarcely deserves the name. For the little knowledge that they are led
to acquire...is merely relative to accomplishments; and accomplishments without a
bottom, for unless the understanding be cultivated, superficial and monotonous is every
grace.
Wollstonecraft overtly states what Austen gestures to via satire. In the education that the Miss
Bertrams receive, in which they are more concerned with the accomplishment of knowing the
difference between watercolours and crayons than the power that artistic expression can give,
or the ability to list rivers in Russia, rather than why it could be valuable to learn about Russia
and its culture or history, they would be classified as having empty minds. If they had reached
a level of true understanding, they would be concerned about Fanny not knowing the same
things as them because they can see the value and application to real life in them. Here, the
reader sees true vanity in which Fannys are more prone to think that Fanny is simply
incompetent and that they are far more capable of learning than her. These accomplishments
truly are superficial, because as the reader knows, if it were not for the cousins status, they
would be perceived as prodigiously stupid, as well.
Wollstonecraft complicates her assertion in her work Thoughts on the Education of
Daughters (1787). She argues that [e]xterior accomplishments are not to be despised, if the
acquiring of them does not satisfy the possessors, and prevent their cultivating the more

Smith 11

important ones (29). Here, the more superficial accomplishments are not critiqued in their
entirety, but rather are only a problem if they satisfy the possessors. They are not categorized
under important accomplishments, but they do not need to be completely eliminated from
education. It is clear that the problem with the Miss Bertrams lies in the fact that they are
satisfied with the accomplishments that they have. Not only are they satisfied, they believe that
these accomplishments truly are the most important ones.
Later on in the second chapter of Mansfield Park, Austens narrator echoes
Wollstonecrafts assertions very closely in relation to the Bertram sisters, in stating that ...it is
not very wonderful that, with all their promising talents and early information, they should be
entirely deficient in the less common acquirements of self-knowledge, generosity and humility
(434). Here, the reader is asked to pity the deficiency of these young ladies in the less
common acquirements rather than Fannys deficiency in memory. Since these acquirements
are more rare, there is a higher value put on them. Instead of a statement of absolutes, like the
reader receives from Mrs. Norris, the narrator offers a statement full of hedges: it is not very
wonderful. The key word here, not, could either be modifying very wonderful or simply
very, so it is unclear how wonderful the lack of these less common accomplishments truly
is. By the use of the word deficient, however, it is clear that the narrator, and Austen in turn,
unflinchingly see the accomplishments as something that young ladies should, indeed, have. This
lack of accomplishments of self-knowledge, generosity, and humility, is satirized in many
moments, including the Miss Bertrams inability to understand and honor the differences in the
ways that they and Fanny were raised, as shown before. One can assume that these less
common accomplishments are directly related to Wollstonecrafts idea of more important

Smith 12

accomplishments, since knowledge should include knowledge of oneself and how to interact
with others.
Fanny, on the other hand, may not have the exterior accomplishments like the Miss
Bertrams, but she definitely has some of the understanding and less common
accomplishments that both Wollstonecraft and Austens narrator address. Fanny, in fact, almost
has too much of these less common accomplishments, for [t]here [i]s no positive ill-nature in
Maria or Julia; and though Fanny [i]s often mortified by their treatment of her, she [thinks] too
lowly of her own claims to feel injured by it. The reader can see self-knowledge, generosity,
and humility in Fannys reaction to the cruel treatment imposed upon her by her cousins. If one
sees the first clause, that of there being no positive ill-nature in Maria or Julia as focalized
through Fanny, that is quite a generous statement. Fanny can see outside of the how this behavior
affects her to understand that her cousins simply do not know any better. She possesses selfknowledge in the fact that she is aware of her own feelings of mortification, and also feels that
her claims are low, based on the level of status, since her lower-class has been made
perfectly clear to her. The fact that she thinks to lowly of her own claims also relates to
humility on a more personal level. Fanny does not believe that her value as a person allows her
to react to the injustice done, for she is just little Fanny. Since Fanny had not received the same
formal education as the Miss Bertrams, it seems that these less common accomplishments
are not to be found through a governess, but rather are parts of ones disposition both inherent
and cultivated by familial relations. The narrator says as much when it is asserted that the Miss
Bertrams [i]n everything but disposition...were admirably taught (434).
Through her satire of the views of Mrs. Norris in stating that female students are
homogenous, but that there is a a vast deal of difference in memory between the Miss Bertrams

Smith 13

and Fanny, Austen offers a strong critique of those that follow the norms of the educational
system without seeing students as individuals and without questioning the practices in place.
This is also manifested in the way that the Bertram sisters immediately believe Fanny to be
prodigiously stupid when she does not have the same knowledge-base as them, even though
she grew up in a completely different educational setting. They do not, in fact, understand why
they have learned what they have, which includes a mix of many different subjects such as
history and geology, but they are certain it is what everyone should know. Both Mrs. Norris and
the Miss Bertrams believe that if one does not know these facts, they must be unable to learn
them. Both Wollstonecraft and Austen are highly opposed to this vision of education.
Wollstonecraft believes that the type of accomplishments that the Miss Bertrams have received
should not satisfy them, for there are far more important types of accomplishment, which
Austen highlights through the characterization of Fanny. These moments from the text serve as a
critique of those in society imposing an overarching, highly specific curriculum on all students
that either must be followed or reflects poorly on the students who cannot succeed.
3. Difference in Memories, Part II: The Capacity of Memory and Student Difference
These moments in which the education and mental capacities of Fanny and her cousins
are compared serve not only as a critique of imposing certain content on students, but of those
that would refuse to acknowledge the workings of the mind. Austen satirizes not only the
ideology of ladies needing to have certain accomplishments, but also plays with the idea that all
students should learn the same way about the same content in the form of basic rote memory.
Mrs. Norriss view on memory is one that many in the Regency Era would have found to be
preposterous. Through the work of many theorists of mind and education, including Vives, Maria
Edgeworth, John Locke, and Stphanie Flicit, comtesse de Genlis, many, by this time, already

Smith 14

would have known that for students who lack the prior knowledge, learning something knew
will take time and effort, and it should be approached with patience. Edgeworth pioneers
overarching theories that embrace students with many different categories of needs and strengths,
and she demonstrates how the same instructional approaches will not work for every student.
Locke explores how rote memory tasks such as those of the Miss Bertrams do not actually
provide the student with any useful knowledge or building of skills of memorization, and he
offers a different approach. The comtesse de Genlis also argues for storing useful and applicable
information in the mind, and she furthers this argument by suggesting that educators should give
students all the knowledge that is within the realm of their abilities.
Though the young cousins in Mansfield declare Fanny to be prodigiously stupid when
she is does not know the principal rivers of Russia, for instance, in Austen, this reduction of
knowledge to rote memory reveals their own ignorance about the abilities of the mind. As early
as 1538, Vives asserts that learning consists of the formation of associations, and retrieval from
memory occurs through automatic activation of associated ideas or through intentional, effortful
search" (Proctor and Johnson 4). As the reader clearly knows, Fanny is intelligent, and any lack
of knowledge is attributed to her lack of educational resources prior to her arrival at Mansfield
Park. She does not have the same associations formulated in her mind as her cousins, so her
ability to connect the principal rivers of Russia to the ideas already in her mind is going to be
far more difficult for her.
Maria Edgeworth, in her work Practical Education (1798), asserts that those who get
overloaded when learning new things due to the lack of prior knowledge or associations on the
subject are not, in fact, stupid, but simply have not had the opportunity to relieve the fatigue
of thinkingby habit (76). On top of dealing with the emotional weight of adjusting to an

Smith 15

entirely new (and somewhat hostile) home, Fanny needs time to internalize and repeat the
cognitive tasks provided before she can reach the level of content knowledge that her cousins are
already familiar with. It is not any fault of hers, but a normal condition of the human brain.
Edgeworth explains that in the exercise of our minds upon subjects that are new to us, we
generally exert more attention than is necessary or serviceable Children, to whom many
subjects are new, are often fatigued by those overstrained and misplaced efforts (77). This
seems a far more sympathetic view of the struggling student than that which Mrs. Norris
proposes. Simply put, when learning new things, students often will get overwhelmed and tired
very quickly, and teachers should take that into account. Edgeworth does not believe that
students should tire themselves either; she believes these efforts are overstrained and
misplaced. Students do not need to exert so much attention, and if they do so, that is
actually a bad learning practice.
Maria Edgeworth believes that different students will have different strengths and
weaknesses that come with different moments of exertion, rather than the all or nothing view
of Mrs. Norris: ... a difference in the temper and talents of children early appears, and some
practical remarks may be of service to correct defects, or to improve abilities, whether we
suppose them to be natural or acquired (84). Edgeworth, in this final clause, whether we
suppose them to be natural or acquired, is not nearly concerned with worrying about the innate
capacities of a student like Mrs. Norris does to justify class distinction. She sees that different
students have different tempers and talents, and there are actions an educator can take in
order to correct defects and to improve abilities. Regardless of where student difference
came from, students of all kinds have different obstacles to face and skills on which to capitalize.

Smith 16

In her work, Edgeworth goes on to describe different kinds of obstacles and skills that
students have in detail, including demonstrating to educators that a student may present as a
different category of student, but there is a root of the problem that has been overlooked. For
Edgeworth, student learning is not simply a one-size-fits-most model in which those that
cannot conform to a teachers educational norms must be deficient in some way. The reader sees
this in her example of the timid student, within which one could easily place the character Fanny,
given that the heroine herself is exceedingly timid and shy, and shrinking from notice (430):
If a timid child foresees that an explanation will probably end in a phillipic, he cannot fix
his attention; he is anticipating the evil of your anger, instead of listening to your
demonstrations; and he says, Yes, yes, I see, I know, I understand, with trembling
eagerness, whilst through the mist and confusion of his fears, he can scarcely see or hear,
much less understand, any thing. If you mistake the confusion and fatigue of terror for
inattention or indolence, and press your pupil to further exertions, you will confirm,
instead of curing, his stupidity. You must diminish his fear before you can increase his
attention (86-87).
In this passage, Edgeworth is quick to make the distinction between an inattentive or
indolent student and a student that is inattentive due to fear of the instructor because of his or
her timidity. In order to remedy this specific case, an educator cannot simply press the student
further on in instruction, but must use ...every playful, every affectionate means...to dissipate
their apprehensions (87). Each student comes with unique strengths and weaknesses that can be
categorized to help educators anticipate certain situations, and it is partially on that educator to
see a students behavior and needs for what they truly are (i.e. mist and confusion of...fears
rather than inattention or indolence). If the teacher does not take action, he or she is
confirming that students stupidity, rather than curing. In this case, stupidity seems to
refer more to the lack of knowledge or understanding that the student carries in this case due to
fear, rather than an innate stupidity. That lack of understanding will be the fault of the teacher
for not choosing a different pedagogical approach that allows the student to feel safe enough to

Smith 17

speak up and ask questions. In the case of Fanny, one could say that Mrs. Norris is confirming
Fannys lack of memory, by being unable or too caught-up in elitism to acknowledge that there
may be other factors contributing to Fannys prior knowledge and how it differs from that of her
cousins. In Edgeworths pedagogical paradigm, students are all complex, and the teacher must
take pains to read each student in-depth in order to figure out to attend to each pupils needs.
With all of her nuanced, in-depth views on the various categories of students in which
educators can place their students, there is still a slight emphasis on conformity rather than
allowing for student difference in Edgeworths Practical Education: The quick and slow, the
timid and presumptuous, should be early instructed so as to correct as much as possible of their
several defects (85). It is clear that in her research on pupils, Edgeworth has allowed for
different learning styles, to a certain extent, given that she discusses different types of students.
There are manifold categories of students, rather than those with memory and those without.
However, it is a model that requires eventual conformity, given that each type of student needs
instruction to correct as much as possible of their several defects. This implies that each
category is defective in many distinct ways, and they should all be moving towards a similar
learning style. Also, by referring to the children as simply quick and slowtimid and
presumptuous, rather than quick and slow studentstimid and presumptuous students, they
are reduced to a single characteristic. Their personhood is not always acknowledged in the same
way in Edgeworths work, since in the passage about the timid student, the reader receives a very
sympathetic, humanizing view, whereas when talking about students in general, Edgeworth is
quick to turn to a reductive, deficit-based model.
As has been shown, Mrs. Norriss more extreme deficit-based model that expects Fanny
to pick up the knowledge and ways of learning that the Miss Bertrams have had training in for

Smith 18

years or condemns her to have no memory is absolutely preposterous. On a more specific level,
the idea of rote memory with no real-life application is critiqued in Austens work, as well.
Jocelyn Harris, in Jane Austens Art of Memory, argues that Austen makes open allusions to John
Lockes views of memory in Some Thoughts Concerning Education in her novel Northanger
Abbey (Moler 363). One can also see this philosophers views manifest themselves in Mansfield
Park. John Locke believes that rote memory activities do not help to strengthen memories or to
allow students to gain valuable knowledge:
I think their [students] memories should be employed, but not in learning rote whole
pages out of books, which, the lesson being once said, and that task over, are delivered up
again to oblivion, and neglected for ever. This mends neither the memory nor the mind...I
think, it may do well to give them something every day to remember, but something still,
that is in itself worth the remembering, and what you would never have out of mind ,
whenever you call, or they themselves search for it. This will oblige them often to turn
their thoughts inwards, then you cannot wish them a better intellectual habit (316).
Locke speaks of memories in the same manner that Mrs. Norris does, as the capacity to
remember, rather than the actual recollections. He, however, does not believe that ones
memory cannot be mended or improved. It simply cannot be mended by means of learning
by rote, in this case whole pages out of books, but in general information that can be
delivered up again to oblivion, and neglected for ever. Since the Miss Bertrams seem to be
concerned with discrete pieces of knowledge, such as the principal rivers of Russia, and not
with how they apply to their lives in a productive way, one can assume that this information has
the potential to be neglected for ever once the young women have achieved the goal of
marriage and a stable station in life. Fannys memory, if given the means, can be strengthened,
according to Locke, if given activities that are actually in [themselves] worth the remembering.
The educator would never have those items or activities out of mind, and in this way, that
which is learned is never taught in isolation, but always have transfer in the pedagogical

Smith 19

practices. If the student turns inward or searches for the idea his or herself, this seems to
suggest that the pupil has found application in his or her life outside of the educational space, and
therefore that memory task has true real life value. If educated in this way, Fanny has a chance
at strengthening her memory and gaining knowledge that she can carry with her all her life.
Stphanie Flicit comtesse de Genlis, in her work Adelaide and Theodore, through the
experiences of educating her own two children for which the piece is entitled, details her own
pedagogical paradigm, which seems to align very much with Lockes pedagogical paradigm with
includes giving students information worth the remembering. She would definitely refute Mrs.
Norriss claim that a young girl could have probably [no memory] at all. According to
Adelaide and Theodore (1782), Children in general are born with memories sufficient to retain a
great deal of useful knowledge (51). Therefore, at least in the comtesse de Genliss eyes, all
children are born with memories that can hold much information, and it is a preposterous notion
to believe a child to have no memory. She also believes that knowledge that is applicable to daily
life should be kept in the memory, and that students ought... never to learn things that are
unnecessary or superfluous (51). Within this educational model, it would not be best practices to
teach young pupils to memorize aspects of history, geography, and geology rotely simply for the
sake of knowing certain facts (such as the principal rivers of Russia and all of the precious
metals and semi-metals). These topics should only be taught as seen fit in relation to the actual
lives of students, and the application of this knowledge should be made explicitly-known to
them. There are two means of arriving at this end; which are, never to tell them what they
cannot understand, and never to neglect giving them every kind of instruction within their
reach (51). In other words, education hinges on the instructor being able to meet the students
where they actually are in both ability and content knowledge and teaching what he or she

Smith 20

reasonably believes the students can accomplish. Fannys instruction can and should look
different from that of the Miss Bertrams because what she understands is different, but she
should be receiving just as rigorous an instruction as that of her cousins, whose education could
be improved in itself, according to these theorists.
In both Mansfield Park and Practical Education, young students are still often rendered,
in the words of Fannys cousin Edmund Bertrams mind, interesting objects (432). In Austens
narrative, Mrs. Norris seems to both negate and allow for difference when it suits her, but it is
always a means to lessen Fannys value. In many ways, it seems as though Austen is satirizing
the mentality that intelligence can be used to reinforce class distinctions, not only in Mrs.
Norriss inconsistency, but in her lack of knowledge about theories of memory and learning at
that time. Different students will have different associations to which they can connect new
ideas, as shown by Vives, and rote memory was not even seen as an indicator of true knowledge
and understanding in medieval times. Maria Edgeworth offers an extensive, humanizing view of
student difference, but she still wants to develop a sense of sameness within students. By her
simplifying students into single categories, she is doing the work of lessening their value and
their humanity. Locke, instead of believing students all need the same knowledge, proposes
memory tasks that will actually be useful and enriching to a students life, rather than learning
for the sake of learning. The comtesse de Genlis openly critiques the kind of education that the
Miss Bertrams receive in Austens text, and she argues that this content knowledge is
superfluous, and that students should be learning everything within their reach rather than
learning what is deemed important but is inaccessible. It is clear that Austen belongs to the
same pedagogical community as theorists such as these through the strong moments of satire
found in the first two chapters of Mansfield Park.

Smith 21

4. Improving the Mind and Extending its Pleasures: Austens Views of Student
Difference and the Role of Educator
Austen does not only demonstrate the views which she opposes through satire, but she
proposes her own pedagogical paradigm through her construction of the novels hero, Fannys
cousin, Edmund Bertram. He serves as Fannys educator, and in his practices, he demonstrates a
type of education that embraces the individuality of the student, utilizes the students strengths,
gives much positive reinforcement, and strives to guide the student to become a life-long learner.
The specific ways in which he attempts to reach these goals are promoted by many of the
educational theorists that have already been shown, including Wollstonecraft, Locke, Edgeworth,
and the comtesse de Genlis. The main shift that occurs between the views of education that are
held by those like Mrs. Norris and those held by Austen centers on the responsibilities of the
teacher versus the responsibilities of the student. Austen places far more responsibility on the
teacher to create student-driven instruction that is based on student interest and need, rather than
blaming the student for any difficulties he or she has in learning.
In the second chapter of Mansfield Park, Edmund realizes that Fanny finds Mansfield
Park a hostile environment and is not receiving the type of guidance and attention that would
best fit her. He decides to take an active role in Fannys well-being, including making sure her
education is properly tailored to her experiences and learner attributes:
Kept back as she was by every body else, his single support could not bring her forward,
but his attentions were otherwise of the highest importance in assisting the improvement
of her mind, and extending its pleasures. He knew her to be clever, to have a quick
apprehension as well as good sense, and a fondness for reading, which properly directed,
must be an education in itself (435).
Edmund is a teacher whose goal is not to change Fanny in order to bring her forward, since she
is such a timid girl. He chooses instead to take advantage of the fact that she is a quick learner
with a fondness for reading, and that these innate attributes on her part could lead to an

Smith 22

education in itself. He is capitalizing on her strengths in order to educate her, but he also simply
wants to extend [her minds] pleasures. Edmund is an educator who sees Fanny as an
individual learner, and he wants to both teach her what is deemed important by society (the
improvement of her mind seems to hint at this because it evokes a value judgment on what is
contained in her mind and not just mental skills), and to make her actually enjoy learning.
The desire to make learning pleasurable to Fanny seems to echo the views that
Wollstonecraft has about education in general: I wish them to be taught to thinkthinking,
indeed, is a severe exercise, and exercise of either mind or body will not first be entered on, but
with a view to pleasure (Thoughts on the Education of Daughters 22-23). In this way, intrinsic
motivation and a liking of being taught is crucial for students to truly be taught to think, and
Austens hero seems to maintain that as a primary goal in his pedagogical practices. Edmunds
practices are also quite similar to Wollstonecrafts since he uses what he knows to be Fannys
strengths and weaknesses to help Fanny learn without attempting to make her conform to some
kind of educational norm. He knows that he cannot completely change who Fanny is. He can
direct Fannys quick apprehension, good sense, and fondness for reading, but he cannot
force those attributes to occur in her mind or craft her into what his ideal student is. This is
exactly the kind of educational advice that Wollstonecraft offers in relation to the education of
young ladies. She recommend[s] the minds being put into a proper train, and then left to
itself...The mind is not, cannot be created by the teacher, though it may be cultivated. and its real
powers found out (54). Edmund has discovered Fannys real powers, and he directs Fannys
mind into a proper train. Through Edmund, it is clear that Austen is echoing theories of
education that emphasize building on the skills that students have and making the learning
experience enjoyable, such as Wollstonecrafts position.

Smith 23

Locke also asserts that it is the educators duty to foster the students love of learning and
being taught, but it needs to happen through active instruction: Use your skill to make his will
supple and pliant to reason: teach him to love credit and commendation; to abhor being thought
ill or meanly of (Locke 275). Here, it is clear that an understanding of the a teachers
particular educational practices is something that must be taught to students. Students must learn
that credit and commendation are positive reinforcement, and they also must learn what it
means to be thought ill or meanly of. It is the teachers skill that allows for this relationship
to build between educator and student, and the teaching of these norms and practices and the way
in which they manifest themselves could vary from teacher to teacher.
Edgeworth, in concordance with Locke, goes further to say that it is actually, not only a
skill of the teacher to develop positive relationships with students, but it is also his or her fault if
he or she fails to do so. In fact, [t]hose, who neglect to cultivate the affections of their pupils,
will never be able to excite them to noble ends, by noble means (19). The inability to be
likeable to students is seen as a moment of neglect on the part of the teacher. If the teacher is
neglectful, then the teacher will never be able to gain progress (noble ends) with the students
with noble means. Instead, [t]heirs will be the dominion of fear, from which reason will
emancipate herself, and from which pride will yet more certainly revolt (19). Without the
affection of students, the educator will become unreasonable and shameful in action, and in the
process of doing so, create a learning environment based in students fear. In this way, many of
the oppressive and fear-based tactics that some of those surrounding Fanny employ do not reflect
on Fannys abilities, but rather their own inability to create a loving, safe space in which Fanny
can learn.

Smith 24

In the case of Edmund, the hero uses the knowledge he has of Fannys specific needs in
order to create the imperative safe environment through a student-oriented approach to positive
reinforcement and consequences. Edmund, by learning about his pupil, understands that she has
an affectionate heart, and a strong desire of doing right along with great sensibility of her
situation, and great timidity (432). Fanny, it seems, does not need as much instruction as other
students on loving credit and commendation and a hatred of being thought ill or meanly of,
since she wants to do what is right and is socially aware. Based on his deductions, Edmund
now [feels] that she required more positive kindness (432). Edmund knows that to make
sure that Fanny is pliant when she is taught, he must use more positive kindness or
reinforcement in order to make learning unintimidating and enjoyable to her.
Edmund, in his pedagogical practices, reaps the benefits of not only Fannys unique and
individual abilities, but also of the things she finds interesting, recommending the books which
charmed her leisure hours. He is not forcing his personal reading choices on her, but rather
encourag[es]her taste. He does correct her judgment, therefore still emphasizing societal
norms to a certain extent, but he also makes reading useful by talking to her of what she read,
and height[s] its attraction by judicious praise (435). Edmund is a teacher that makes knowledge
applicable and pleasant for his young pupil. Austens view of reading education seems to be
closely aligned with Lockes vision of this instruction, in which those about [the student] will
talk to him often about the stories he has read, and hear him tell them, it will, besides other
advantages, add encouragement and delight to his reading, when he finds there is some use and
pleasure in it ( 277). In both cases, reading is made useful through discussion and instruction
should be filled with encouragement and enjoyment. Austen, through her crafting of Edmunds
positive educational practices in Fannys life, is vouching for an education that looks at what

Smith 25

students can bring to the table, using that not only to guide content but also to foster motivation.
Students are meant to be empathized with and encouraged, rather than molded into an ideal of
society.
The comtesse de Genlis advocates a similar educational paradigm for her own daughter,
Adelaide, openly refuting the ideal education of society, which includes History, Mythology,
and Geography. She roots her own practices in intrinsic motivation in topics, real-life
application, and the enjoyment of reading:
She will neither understand History, Mythology, nor Geography, except what she has
gained by our tapestry, our conversation, and other methods... In this respect I think she
will be better instructed than children in general are; she will have many other
accomplishments, which will only be discovered by living with her, and which she has
acquired in the form of amusements... (51)
Unlike the Miss Bertrams, all of Adelaides instruction is firmly grounded in how it applies to
her immediate life, since her lessons are guided by her surroundings her familys tapestry,
conversation, etc., only..discovered by living with her This mother believes that is proper
instruction, rather than simply learning something because it is what society deems valuable. Not
only are the lessons directly connected to Adelaides life, but they are also acquired in the form
of amusements. Austen, through Edmunds practices, is just one of many in a community of
educational theorists that strives to extend [the minds] pleasures while learning.
Through her work, Mansfield Park, Austen offers a clear portrayal of many educational
views, including the elitist views of Mrs. Norris and her nieces the Miss Bertrams, who believe
that there are certain things that people simply should know, and if someone does not, it is
because of a lack of innate capacity. Austens own opinions come shining through in the satire
she produces of the characters that project the ideas of a proper student and education, along
with the insertion of the hero, Edmund, as an effective and impactful educator for Fanny. The

Smith 26

narrators good graces are with him, as he takes into account his pupils personal strengths and
weaknesses, along with what she actually finds interesting. He is still conscious of what
knowledge society deems to be important, but he also wants Fanny to be motivated by the joy
and pleasure of learning new concepts and reading many works. This form of education proves
to be highly successful for Fanny, whereas the Miss Bertrams are found to be morally and
intellectually inferior throughout the novel. In this way, Austen views align with many of the
educational beliefs of theorists such as Maria Edgeworth, John Locke, the comtesse de Genlis,
and Mary Wollstonecraft. All of these authors belong to a class of educators that supports an
education that includes practices that include aspects such as encouragement, development of
personal interests, and fostering a love of learning by using difference to inform instruction in
order to tailor educational practices to each student.
5. Reflection, Amusement, and Coping: Purposes of Reading in the Eighteenth Century
In exploring education, Austen initially provides an extensive view of the education of
young girls by contrasting between the education of the Miss Bertrams and of Fanny, along with
related paradoxical educational paradigms. In this stage, there is much emphasis on the capacity
of the student and what educational practices should be enacted with students with individual
needs and interests (i.e. imposing a norm or embracing difference). As Fanny becomes a young
woman, however, Austen begins to explore the effects of education on the mind, rather than how
the mind should influence instruction. The main comparison that emerges in sections detailing
Fannys young adulthood is between Fanny and her rival in the romantic plotline, Mary
Crawford. Miss Crawford, coming from a prestigious family, has already completed her proper
education, whereas Fanny still has a desire to learn due to Edmunds previous instruction.
Edmund has successful in his goal to extend Fannys minds pleasures while improving it

Smith 27

at the same time, since Fanny continues to pursue knowledge through reading and experiencing
nature. In the eighteenth century, the pursuit of knowledge through reading was seen as a noble
one, but many authors, such as Hester Chapone, cautioned against the reading of novels that
would inflame passions rather than teach readers to control them through reason. Fannys
reading choices fall within the realm of safety, including moral essays and informational texts,
but some of Austens other heroines show that Austen embraces many purposes for reading that
do not have to be related to reason and reflection. Hester Chapone and Mary Wollstonecraft also
embrace the various purposes of reading, and they believe that there are many good novels in the
world that blend entertainment with good morals.
Edmund himself is quite impressed with Fannys reading choices when he seeks her
advice about whether or not to participate in a potentially scandalous household theatrical
production spearheaded by his brother. Fanny refuses to take part, whereas Edmund
begrudgingly decides that he must. To diffuse the situation, Edmund changes the subject and
takes on his old role of educational mentor yet again:
You in the meanwhile will be taking a trip into China, I suppose. How does Lord
Macartney go on? ...And here are Crabbes Tales, and the Idler, at hand to relieve you, if
you tire of your great book. I admire your little establishment exceedingly; and as soon as
I am gone, you will empty your head of all this nonsense of acting, and sit comfortably
down to your table(511).
Fanny, in her current self-education, not only picks books that Edmund believes to be both
interesting and informative for her, but she also gives herself options that require different levels
of effort. In this case, her substantial text is a journal kept by Lord McCartney that allows her to
take a trip to China (Ford). Both Crabbes Tales and Johnsons the Idler can provide
education along with a mental break for Fanny. Edmund implies that Fanny can rid herself of the
worries of the theatrical piece, or empty her mind, through the act of reading. In this case, it

Smith 28

seems that reading is not solely a diversion, but an act that clears the mind of unnecessary or
unproductive information and fills it with knowledge that is useful. Although Fanny is now an
independent learner, since she has set up the little establishment herself, Edmund still knows
that positive reinforcement and acknowledgement of admiration will augment the motivation
that he instilled in her years ago.
Austen, through Fanny, shows options for reading that many educational theorists would
have approved of, such as entertaining essays such as The Idler which are just as informative
and important to the development of the mind as other denser texts. Hester Chapone, in Letters
on the Improvement of the Mind, Addressed to a Lady (1773), gives extensive advice on texts
that young women should read to better themselves. In relation to moral essays like The Idler,
Mrs. Chapone argues that they are particularly useful to young people, as they...introduce many
ideas and observations that are new to themand lead to a habit of reflecting on the characters
and events that come before them in real life, which I consider as the best exercise of the
understanding(167-68). In this way, moral essays can offer fictional but true to life situations for
readers to learn about and practice the act of reflecting on, which, in turn, can lead to them
approaching similar people and situations in their lives with more understanding. For Fanny, this
kind of practice in new real-life situations that Mrs. Chapone asserts moral essays can
provide would be of utmost importance and aid to her life. Fanny spent the first ten years of her
life in poverty, where there were limited resources to be able to be exposed to the tools to reflect
on the characters and events that come before [her] real life, and at Mansfield Park, she has led
such a sheltered and confined life that the only way for her to learn more about the ways of the
world and of other people is through active exposure to literature.

Smith 29

Since the way that one interacts with fictional characters influences the way that one
interacts with people in life, some eighteenth-century educational theories argue that certain
written works have the potential to impact the reader in a negative way, as well, by offering
unrealistic or immoral depictions of life that cloud the mind. Instead of providing means for
reflection and understanding, some works indulge the emotional rather than the minds logical
side. Mrs. Chapone, although praising the merits of moral essays, warns that ...the greatest care
should be taken in the choice of those fictitious stories that so enchant the mind; most of which
tend to inflame the passions of youth, whilst the chief purpose of education should be to
moderate and restrain them (168). It is not that all fictional stories, even the ones that enchant
the mind are problematic, but that there are many that do not inform the reader or provide the
practice in how to handle ones passions. Chapone believes that the chief purpose of
education should be to moderate and restrain the passions, which in the highly structured and
regulated society of the Regency Era would be of utmost importance to survival.
In relation to reading fictional works, it seems there is a dichotomy between that which
is dangerous and inflames the passions, and that which is educational and teaches the reader to
restrain those passions. Since the explicit warning against those that are dangerous is made, it
must be very easy to accidentally fall into enchantment, so to speak. A Letter from a Father to
his Daughter at a Boarding-School echoes these exact concerns, saying that it would be a poor
educational choice for young women if ...they should be misled by the illusions of fancy, or by
the reading of certain books, whose authors, though very honest, and very pious, seem to have
written more of the passions, than to the cool reason and judgment of mankind(50). In this case,
novels can be either fanciful, and therefore not inform about real-life, or they can be
honest and even pious novels, but deal with more of the passions than cool reason and

Smith 30

judgment of mankind. Either way, the mind is clouded and stripped of its logical capacities. It is
no wonder that Fanny chooses to spend her time with informational works such as an
ambassador to Chinas journal and moral essays, since the danger of losing ones mind to
passions seems to be very strong.
Not all of Austens characters shrink from the fictional novel, however, including
Charlotte from the unfinished Sanditon. Charlotte sees the characteristics of the heroine of a
novel in the young lady, Clara, but does not reach a dangerous, quixotic level of belief about the
relationship between the two, because she [i]s a very sober-minded young Lady, sufficiently
well-read in Novels to supply her Imagination with amusement, but not at all unreasonably
influenced by them (346). For Charlotte, due to her sober personality, she is able to be wellversed in fiction for amusement purposes, but they will not leave her in danger of having her
passions inflamed. She can see similarities between fiction and real-life when reflecting on other
people in relation to characters, but she clearly knows the difference between reality and fiction.
Therefore, being well-read in Novels to supply [ones] Imagination with amusement is not a
danger, but rather one of many purposes for the act of reading with its own unique benefits.
Emma from Austens unpublished, unfinished work, The Watsons, shows another distinct
purpose of reading different from that of education or amusement. Austens heroine actively
chooses to dissociate from the logic of her mind in order to escape from the unpleasant ideas
she is experiencing. For Emma, her situation [i]s hardly such as to make reflection very
soothing, and therefore Mrs. Chapones suggestions are not beneficial to this heroines mental
health. Once Emmas Thought [has] been freely indulged, she must divert herself because it is
no longer productive to enter in to the negative thoughts that flood her mind. In this case, reading
is not simply an educational act, but is a coping mechanism. Emma, looking forward to the

Smith 31

dissipation of unpleasant ideas which only reading could produce,...turn[s] thankfully to a book
(317). Fanny chooses different texts to read based on the level of cognitive exertion that would
ensue, and she is sure to give herself mental breaks that still can produce education in how to
control the passions. Regardless of what she is reading, the content is sure to produce reflection
on the human condition. Charlotte reads novels for entertainment, but is sober-minded enough
to know the difference between fiction and reality. Emma Watson uses reading as a mental break
from this kind of reflection when logical thoughts surrounding her own human condition start to
inflame her passions in a negative way that leads to both a cognitive and emotional overwhelm.
Austen, through these characters along with others, highlights not one but many different
purposes for reading novels that can be beneficial to the mind, whether it be to inform oneself
about the world, to entertain, or to cope.
Although Hester Chapone warns of the danger of certain fictional stories and how they
can enchant the mind, she sees the multiplicity of purposes for reading, as well, and does not
shirk entertainment in the face of learning proper moderation and restraint. In the same passage
from which the reader receives her warning, Chapone assures the reader that there are however
works of this class in which excellent morality is joined with the most lively pictures of the
human mind, and with all that can entertain the imagination and interest the heart (169). In this
way, the student should not have to read things that do not interest him or her in order to learn of
morality, since works that can provide both entertainment and lessons do, in fact exist.
Furthermore, Chapone refuses to put restrictions on what young women should read, and she
trusts them to take her advice and know what is best for themselves: Whatever tends to
embellish your fancy, to enlighten your understanding, and furnish you with ideas to reflect upon
when alone, or to converse upon in company, is certainly well worth your acquisition (157).

Smith 32

This whatever, leaves much room for personal taste on the behalf of the reader, as long as it
offers enlightening ideas for reflection and conversation, and it embellishes ones fancy. Mary
Wollstonecraft, in Thoughts on the Education of Daughters, too, argues that [t]here are in our
language many [books], in which instruction and amusement are blended (51). She goes as far
to argue that it is a better educational practice to read these types of books, for [r]eason strikes
most forcibly when illustrated by the brilliancy of fancy (51) Her connection with Chapone is
strong yet again by saying that with the mind set to work, it may be allowed to chuse books for
itself, for every thing will then instruct (52). Wollstonecraft extends Chapones concept of
student-selected texts, saying that the anything chosen by a mind set to work can instruct.
Therefore, education through reading is not solely a matter of which text is chosen, but how the
text is framed in the mind of the reader.
The framing of the text does not exclusive to educational purposes in the opinion of these
educational theorists. When Chapone and Wollstonecraft refer to fancy, it is not a danger that
can lead to the muddling of the mind, but rather the capacity to imagine, which is, as Chapone
explicitly states, an important quality to maintain. It is true that the ability to moderate ones
passions is crucial, but the faculty, in which women usually most excel, is that of imagination;
and, when properly cultivated, it becomes the source of all that is most charming in society
(159). Thus, reading, although it has many moral merits, also has an educational role in ones
ability to function within society, and imagination can lead to a young womans charm.
Chapone, Wollstonecraft, and Austen seem to agree that there is not one single educational
purpose to reading, but that both entertainment and instruction can lead to a person functioning
better within society, since Austens heroines read for so many reasons and find what society
deems happiness in the endmarriage.

Smith 33

6. Taste in Nature: A Case Study in the Effects of Different Educational Backgrounds

In Fannys marriage plot in Mansfield Park, her rival comes in the form of Mary
Crawford, and Austen positions these rivals against each other on many levels, including class
and education. Mary is the antithesis to Fannyoutspoken, slightly abrasive, and coming from a
place of privilege. Whereas in the chapters addressing Fannys childhood, Fanny is continuously
compared with her cousins, the Miss Bertrams, in her young adulthood, Fanny is pitted against
the young woman who has caught Edmunds eye. The reader sees the effects of an education
based in societal norms on Mary Crawford, versus the effects of an education based on
individual interest and need in Fanny. Although there are no scenes detailing differences in
reading interests, there are strong differences between the two young womens knowledge and
appreciation of natureanother facet of taste to be developed through education.
Austen demonstrates this difference of taste in the scene in which Fanny visits the home
of Mr. Rushworth, one of the Miss Bertrams future husbands, and takes advantage of the new
experience to learn about nature from the surroundings:
...Fanny, whose rides had never been extensive, was soon beyond her knowledge, and
was very happy in observing all that was new, and admiring all that was pretty... Her own
thoughts and reflections were habitually her best companions; and in observing the
appearance of the county, the bearings of the roads, the difference of soil, the state of the
harvest, the cottages, the cattle, the children, she found entertainment (469)
Instead of talking with those around her, she sees this moment for its educational merit, and she
seems to have a very in-depth knowledge of not only what is aesthetically pleasing in nature, but
of what it takes for a community to thrive. She is not only concerned with all that was pretty,
but with the bearings of the roadsthe state of the harvest[and] the children. In this case,
Fanny is making connections among many topics that she has learned about, and she is fully
engaged with her learning task.

Smith 34

Miss Crawford, however, does not seem to share the same passion for making an
educational experience out of new situations. She is more concerned with entertaining herself,
since she has already completed a young ladys formal education, as shown by being out in
society. It is not simply because of the life of privilege within the confines of societys norms that
Mary has lived, but rather part of her natural disposition. She is not disposed to learn about the
same things as Fanny, for [s]he ha[s] none of Fannys delicacy of taste, of mind, of feeling; she
[sees] nature, inanimate nature, with little observation; her attention [i]s all for men and women,
her talents for the light and lively (469). In this quotation, the reader sees Austen invoking the
all or nothing dynamics yet again, but to a different effect. Rather than quantifying a single
thing (such as memory,), Austen is positioning Fanny as having all of the delicacy of taste,
of mind, of feeling, and Mary, in contrast, has having all of the talents for the light and
lively and all of the attention for men and women. This does imply that Mary has a
deficiency in the type of delicacy that Fanny has, but it also implies that Fanny does not have
the same ability to lighten-up that Mary does. Since this passage comes directly after Fannys
effusive feelings about seeing a new environment, one can assume that the narrator, and by
proxy, Austen are making a slight jab at those that cannot appreciate nature in the same way that
Fanny can. The narrator, however, is not so quick to talk as extremely in absolutes as Mrs. Norris
did when discussing Fanny and the Miss Bertrams at the beginning of the novel.
Although not overtly condemning Mary for not taking an interest in nature, it is true that
many eighteenth-century education experts such as Mrs. Chapone see the merit of having a good
taste for nature, and this taste is beneficial and important in the education of a young woman:
If you survey the earth, every leaf that trembles in the breeze, every blade of grass
beneath your feet, is a wonder as absolutely beyond the reach of human art to imitate as
the construction of the universe. Endless pleasures, to those who have a taste for them,

Smith 35

might be derived from the endless variety to be found in the composition of this globe
and its inhabitants (165).
Nature is not inanimate, but rather the wondrous composition of this globe and its
inhabitants. To not see anything to observe in nature, when every leaf and every blade is a
wonder, and there are endless pleasures, must be a deficiency of some sort. Whether it comes
from the disposition of the persons mind, which may be the case in Marys light and lively
mind, or it comes from the kind of education one has received, in which nature has become
something that is proper to learn and therefore loses its charm, the person who cannot find
enjoyment in nature is missing out on a grand opportunity to learn and to be entertained. Fanny,
therefore, with her ability to be completely engaged in observing nature to the point where her
companions no longer pose any interest for her, has been raised with the proper taste for natures
many wonders.
Given that in the society into which Austens characters are constructed, a womans taste
and level of cultivation is extremely important to the goal of obtaining an advantageous
marriage, the comparison in minds and education of Fanny and Mary becomes a central point of
contrast as Mansfield Park progresses. A key contributor to the readers ability to understand that
Edmund will not choose Fannys rival in the end is their differences of beliefs about what is
proper, along with Fannys and Edmunds similarities. Obviously, part of the reason that Fanny
and Edmund are so compatible is that Edmund was able to guide Fanny in her education, and
therefore she has developed mentally through the educational resources that Edmund has
exposed her to. One night when Mary Crawford and her brother are paying a visit, Fanny isolates
herself by a window to enjoy the picturesque evening. When Edmund approaches, she cannot
help but excitedly relay her pleasure in the view. In a foreshadowing of the incompatibility of
Mary and Edmund, the hero replies,I like to hear your enthusiasm, Fanny. It is a lovely night,

Smith 36

and they are much to be pittied who have not been taught to feel in some degree as you do-who
have not at least been given a taste for nature in early life. They lose a great deal (487). In what
seems like a compliment to Fanny, Edmund is (knowingly or unknowingly) complimenting his
own pedagogical prowess, since he, in fact, is the one that gave Fanny a taste for nature early in
life. Fanny is sure to make him acknowledge this in his compliment by saying, You taught me
to think and feel on the subject, cousin (487). Finally, Edmund gives a compliment that is
completely Fannys: I had a very apt scholar... (487). By describing Fanny as apt, Edmund
is admitting that Fanny had a predisposition to appreciate nature in the way that she does, and in
this way, in his educational practices, he truly was looking to her talents and needs. He has not
simply imposed his own beliefs on her. The reader can now make the connection between how
nature is inanimate to Mary, and how this would not bode well in a relationship between her
and Edmund. Fanny is a far more compatible companion, at least in relation to this aspect of
taste and education.
Delicate vs. Light and Lively:A Difference in Memory and Attention Based on the
Effects of Education
Throughout her novel, Mansfield Park, Austen centers much of the conflict on
differences between characters, especially at the level of education and how it influences
characters throughout their lives. At the beginning of the novel, when Fanny is still a child, she
is implicitly contrasted with her privileged relatives on the levels of status and education.
Explicitly, her cousins, the Miss Bertrams, cannot conceive of how Fanny has not learned the
same things that they have, and their aunt, instead of attributing it to Fanny belonging to a poorer
family, decides Fanny probably has no memory at all, while the Miss Bertrams have
wonderful memories. When the shift in Fannys character from child to young woman occurs,
a change in comparison occurs. Fanny then becomes positioned in contrast to Mary Crawford,

Smith 37

the outgoing, well-educated young woman from a prestigious family. As has been shown, in
relation to taste and interest, Fanny is far more delicate with a love of observing nature,
whereas Mary pays attention to other people and has talents that are light and lively.
In the latter part of the novel, Austen re-incorporates views of memory alongside the
contrast of taste and interest, this time her own views, rather than satirizing those that would
blame inherent capacities for the differences in education that class bring. While sitting with
Mary outside, Fanny begins to speak about the glories of the memory and what it can do. Austen,
through Fannys meta-reflection on memory, brings in her own comparison of memory capacities
that is not a black-and-white, extreme view, but rather a comprehensive, understanding one:
If any one faculty of our nature may be called more wonderful than the rest, I do think it
is memory. There seems something more speakingly incomprehensible in the powers, the
failures, the inequalities of memory, than in any other of our intelligences. The memory is
sometimes so retentive, so serviceable, so obedient-at others, so bewildered and so weakand at others again, so tyrannic, so beyond controul!-We are to be sure a miracle in every
way-but our powers of recollecting and of forgetting, do seem peculiarly past finding
out (538-539).
In this passage, the reader sees inequalities of memory, re-defined. Instead of discussing
differences in memories among separate people, Fanny discusses the inequalities found within
a single memory. Each minds capacity to remember comes with different levels of obedience
and tyranny beyond control. Through Fannys declaration, the reader receives Austens view
that there are some facets of the memory that can be trained, but others that are simply out of the
persons power. Where someones recollecting and forgetting abilities fall are past finding
out. Within one minds memory alone, there are so many inconsistencies, that one cannot
clearly define what is a deficiency and what is a lack of effort or education. Through these
remarks, Austen openly gives a critique of those that would believe as Mrs. Norris does at the
novels start.

Smith 38

Directly after Fannys declaration of her beliefs on memory, Austen also incorporates
aspects of attention, for Miss Crawford, untouched and inattentive, had nothing to say... (539).
For Miss Crawford, whose talents are light, she cannot be moved by meta-reflections by the
workings of the mind. She also, for all her interest in other people, cannot handle this substantive
discussion given by Fanny because it is reflective rather than lively. Due to her inability to
attend to a conversation that requires delicacy of mind and feelings, Mary is literally silenced.
By her inability to speak on the subject, she inadvertently plays a role in Austens views of the
mind. Those apt to Fannys kinds of taste can demonstrate understanding on topics that deal
with the minds working, learning, and by extension, education. Those who are caught up in the
workings of society without pausing to question or reflect cannot enter these conversations
because they will not be moved and or place any value in them.
One may be wary of believing that Fanny would have the flexibility of mind to actively
question societal norms or decisions of those in authority, given that Edmund is her good friend,
role model, and educator, and has been her entire life, and therefore, she would most likely fall
into accordance with him in her beliefs. For instance, Edmund disapproved of the theatrical
performance and is pleased when Fanny decides not to follow him and take part in it. When it
comes to the Crawfords, however, the two of them do not have the same underlying mentality.
From the beginning, Fanny is wary of Mary Crawford and her brother, but Edmund takes a liking
to Mary. Edmund, believing that him helping to educate Fanny will be enough for them to agree
on all subjects, assures himself that [h]aving formed her mind and gained her affections, he
ha[s] a good chance of her thinking like him (459). It is now clear that he was aware of his
pedagogical practices when he began teaching Fannyhe knew he had to gain her affections,
but he makes the prideful mistake of believing himself to have formed her mind, rather than

Smith 39

capitalizing on her minds inherent capabilities and helping them flourish through guidance. In
the next clause, the narrator satirizes this bold claim, stating that at this period, and on this
subject there began now to be some danger of dissimilarity [of thought] (459). By the use of
qualifiers that try to minimize the potential of dissimilarity in thinking between Edmund and
Fanny, in this case, stating there is only some danger of that disagreement, the narrator is
hinting through free-indirect discourse that Edmunds prideful misconception of Fannys mind
makes it very difficult for him to believe that there is even a possibility of the two of them not
aligning in all beliefs.
Although Edmund finds it inconceivable, the point of disagreement between Edmund and
Fanny in the case of Miss Crawford is heightened as the contrast between the two young women
continues. In the process, because of Edmunds bias where Miss Crawford is concerned, the
teacher-student roles become reversed. Fanny must quietly guide Edmund to reflect on his
feelings for Miss Crawford. Edmund has his concerns about Marys behavior, but he refuses to
be concerned about Marys character:
...I know her disposition to be as sweet and faultless as your own, but the influence of
her former companions makes her seem, gives to her conversation, to her professed
opinions, sometimes a tinge of wrong. She does not think evil, but she speaks it-speaks it
in playfulness-and though I know it to be playfulness, it grieves me to the soul (572).
Edmund cannot abandon his role of educator completely, even when discussing his current
romantic interest. He has noticed her disposition and how exactly it could be improved, even
noting the bad influence made on her that makes her speak evil. Somehow, even though one
must think an idea in order to be able to produce it via speech, he cannot believe that she would
ever have some problematic thoughts. Fanny, yet again reading her cousin well, explicitly states
what Edmund will not, attributes this behavior to [t]he effect of education (572). Her
previous instructor could not but agree to it, declaring Yes, that uncle and aunt! They have

Smith 40

injured the finest mind!-for sometimes, I own to you, it does appear more than manner; it appears
as if the mind itself was tainted (572-573). Edmund, still refusing to believe that Mary is in
control of her behavior at all, attributes his concerns about her playfulness, to her uncle and
aunt injuring and perhaps tainting the finest mind. Fanny cannot help but agree that
education has played a role in Marys actions. Austen, through this interchange, seems to be
declaring that deficiencies in character and mind are not necessarily caused by an inherent
characteristic of a person while a student, but rather an effect of education gone wrong.
Educators can actively cause harm to their pupils minds if their pedagogical practices are not
sound and based in the needs of the students, while providing them with social prowess, as well.
Throughout the portion of Mansfield Park dedicated to Fannys young adulthood and
overt marriage plot, Miss Crawford and the heroine are contrasted on many levels. Through a
specific example, that of interest in naturean important component of ones taste, the reader
learns that Fanny has a delicacy of taste, of mind, of feeling, and she highly enjoys reflection
on her thoughts. Mary Crawford, on the other hand, gives her attention to other people, and has
talents that are light and lively. Through Fannys demonstration of one of her reflections in
discussing the marvels of ones memory, Miss Crawfords difference of mind is more explicitly
coded as a deficiency, since she literally cannot enter the discussion. Finally, through a
conversation between Edmund and Fanny on Miss Crawford, which demonstrates how student
can teach the teacher, as well, it is shown that Miss Crawfords mind is potentially injured due
to the education she has received, whereas Fanny has been properly guided to the point where
she can guide her past educator and continue to educate herself.
This contrast between two young women seems to contradict that comparison that Austen
satirizes between the Miss Bertrams and Fanny via Mrs. Norris statements on memory. In Mrs.

Smith 41

Norris elitist views that many eighteenth-century educational theorists and theorists of mind
have debunked, some people are born with a better general memory or ability to learn, and no
other factors can contribute to whether or not someone knows and acts on what they should
know by societys standards. It is a general sink or swim mentality, and she has imparted it to
her nieces the Miss Bertrams, who believe Fanny to be stupid for not knowing content such as
the rivers or Russia. Austen, through the comparison between Miss Crawford and Fanny,
seems to be arguing that any deficiencies of mind or character in societys eyes come after
education has been administered, and they are the effects of either a poor education or one that
does not attend to a students needs and interests in the best way. Fanny, although not exposed to
the amount of cultivation and educational resources as Mary, is the most socially competent and
is now a motivated life-long learner, as shown by her reading practices. Mary, on the other hand,
has had the normative proper education, but it seems to have done harm to her mind, causing
her to speak evil. She has not been instilled with the reflective practices that educators such as
Mary Wollstonecraft and Mrs. Chapone see as absolutely crucial to ones education, as shown by
her behavior during Fannys speech on memory. In this way, Austen moves from critiquing those
who would blame the student for deficiency of mind, to demonstrating the best practices in
education according to her own model, to showing her beliefs which place the fault on an
educator (or perhaps educational system) that will not look to the individual needs and
capabilities of students to guide instruction and content matter.
7. Reflections and Implications: Perspectives of an Educator and Literary
Neuroscientist
Through this comprehensive view of both Austens pedagogical paradigm, and those of
Austens predecessors and contemporaries, it has been possible to truly understand the references
to education that Austen makes in Mansfield Park, along with what stake these kinds of claims

Smith 42

truly had within the eighteenth century. It has allowed an exploration of historicized views of
learning, rather than attempting to impose current educational and cognitive theory on a text
written in a different time within a completely different society. This investigation of the history
of learning and memory in relation to literary texts used as primary texts, however, does open up
a lot of doors to reflection on the conversations that happened both in the eighteenth century and
in recent years in relation to the education of all students. If upholding literary works like
Mansfield Park as a primary, ethnographic text that promote and dismiss many theories relating
to education, learning, and memory, one can use these views to make connections like those
between Edmunds practices and the best practices of today. One can use fiction, which is
often denied the name informational, to see how certain facets of society have evolved and
grown out of what has been represented through literature and therefore reflects actual views of
the past. Through this type of research, there are still many new things that Austen, among
others can teach.
One certainty provided by this new knowledge is that many of the educational views held
at Austens time are still upheld today, but are manifested in different ways. It is clear that
Austen, in theorizing the role that individual difference plays in the role of reading, learning, and
education at large, is anticipating some of the leaps and bounds that have been made in modern
educational practices in an effort to reconcile the needs of all students. Austens educational
paradigm seems to align very closely with the modern concept of differentiated instruction,
which is based on the premise that teachers should adapt instruction to student differences, and
emphasizes that teachers should modify their instruction to meet students' varying readiness
levels, learning preferences, and interests (Willis and Mann). She also seems to align with
Sherman Alexies views that reading happens for many reasons, but at the core of all that

Smith 43

students read, their needs and personal growth should be present. Overarching debates between
those that believe what society deems important curriculum occurred in relation to standards of
female accomplishment in Austens time, and now there is much debate over the implementation
of the Common Core State Standards, and whether or not these overarching standards are
beneficial to all students learning.
The level of reflection necessary to make these connections allows educators to look not
only at history with a critical eye, but give enough distance from the society of today to allow for
reflections on ones own practices and the practices of society at large. One suggestion for the
classroom that could potentially be gathered from Austens views is a call for a lower student-toteacher ratio, so that teachers could have the space necessary to truly invest in the needs of all
students, instead of attempting to balance an insurmountable number at once. Her views also
reinforce the importance of positive reinforcement of all shapes and sizes in the classroom,
whether it is simply listening to a student when he or she tells the teacher about something he or
she finds interesting, or being very vocal in praise when a shy student answers a question. A final
lesson is that it is important that students are aware of the society that they find themselves in
and how they can maneuver through it. This does not mean asking them to blindly follow
societal norms Fanny is willing to speak-up about what she disagrees with, but rather giving
them social wherewithal.
Along with reflections that can be made about the current educational system, this
historical exploration itself also has interesting implications for the classroom. The process of
using literature in an in-depth close reading, but as a primary text, is one that gives the researcher
a lot of agency in the type of arguments that he or she wants to make, and it fosters a lot of
critical thinking on both the historical and societal level, as has been shown. It would be

Smith 44

interesting, at the secondary level, to see how framing a literary text through either a broader
ethnographic lens or a history of mind lens would lend itself to student engagement and level of
rigor in analysis. It would be interesting, for example, to frame a text such as To Kill a
Mockingbird this way. One of Francine Proses issues with the teaching of this text is that
educators are wont to oversimplify the novel into a text about racism (78). There are many
different frames that teachers could employ that would eradicate the reduction of this text. For
instance, one could analyze the portrayal of Boo Radley as a reflection of societal views of
mental ability, or the construction of prejudiced characters and their actions towards Tom and
Atticus as a reflection of views of racism, rather than just saying that these issues are simply
themes within the text. The supplemental texts that students investigate in relation to the anchor
text would look far different, and could include other fascinating primary texts from that time
period. The transfer of the history of mind lens (and broader societal lenses) into a secondary
classroom has the potential to foster strong critical thinking skills, student agency, and creativity,
since the links one can make among primary texts depend on the specific researcher.
Research done in history of mind and education through literature also has connections to
the realm of literary neuroscience, specifically the work being done at the Digital Humanities
and Literary Cognition lab under Professor Natalie Phillips. Many of the participants from the
fMRI experiment in which they read the chapter surrounding the child Fannys education
explicitly discuss the role of education in the novel. By investigating the ways in which they
position education whether it is in relation to class, to gender, or to Fannys personal growth, one
can see what kinds of critical lenses these subjects have employed, and what they have been able
to gather from a single chapter of the text. It would be interesting to see if Austens views are
made explicitly known to subjects consistently, and what kind of minute details made the views

Smith 45

specifically in regards to education so remarkable to these subjects. Since education is a major

trend among subjects, the evidence that points back to this theme could be attributed to certain
passages, which in turn could be related back to the activity in the brain. Obviously, the these
links would not point to the education part of the brain, but there may be some interesting
findings in what regions of the brain activate when reading and thinking about themes
surrounding education (which, in turn, are vast and always connected to several other topics like
class and gender), or if a link can even be made between the two.
There are many further directions for this specific research, which was a comprehensive
view of the role of the individual in female education, but left much to be said about other
aspects of pedagogy. It would be interesting, for instance, to investigate the eighteenth-century
roles of attention in education and how they influence views of education at large. Another realm
of study that could help to flesh-out these findings would be an extensive view of the role of the
individual in male education in relation to theories of learning and memory in order to see what
trends and differences exist between the two. One final addition that could help to connect this
work to theories of today would be to incorporate modern cognitive science, not in order to
impose it on the past, but in order to flesh-out some of the understanding of historical theories of
mind. These are just a few of the many ways that this research could continue to grow and
flourish, but these findings also offer much on their own in the realm of literature, education, and
history of mind, as has been shown by the connections that can be made to education theory,
English education practices, and literary neuroscience.

Works Cited
Alexie, Sherman. Why the Best Kids Books are Written in Blood. The Wall Street Journal.

Smith 46

Dow Jones & Company, Inc., 9 Jun. 2011. Web. 7 May 2015.
A Letter from a Father to his Daughter at Boarding-School.
Austen, Jane. Mansfield Park. Jane Austen: The Complete Novels. n.ed. New York: Penguin
Books, 2006. Print.
---. Sanditon. Northanger Abbey, Lady Susan, The Watsons, and Sanditon. Ed. John Davie. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1990. Print.
---. The Watsons. Northanger Abbey, Lady Susan, The Watsons, and Sanditon. Ed. John Davie.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1990. Print.
Chapman, George. A Treatise on Education, with a Sketch of Authors Method. London: T.
Cadell, 1784. Google Play. Web. 16 Mar. 2015.
Chapone, Hester. Letters on the Improvement of the Mind, Addressed to a Young Lady. London:
H. Hughs, 1773. Eighteenth-Century Collections Online. Web. 8 May 2015.
Comtesse de Genlis, Stphanie Flicit. Adelaide and Theodore, Or, Letters on Education:
Containing All the Principles Relative to Three Different Plans of Education; to that of
Princes, and to Those of Young Persons of Both Sexes. Dublin: Pat Wogan, 1796. Google
Play. Web. 16 Mar. 2015.
Edgeworth, Maria. Practical Education. Boston: T. B. Wait and Sons, 1815. Project Gutenberg.
Web. 26 Jan. 2015.
Ford, Susan A. Fannys Great Book: Macartneys Embassy to China and Mansfield Park.
Jane Austen Society of North America. 28.2 (2008): n.pag. Web. 5 May 2015.
Locke, John. Some Thoughts Concerning Education. London: National Societys Depository,
1880. Google Play. Web. 16 Mar. 2015.
Moler, Kenneth L. Jane Austens Art of Memory by Jocelyn Harris. Nineteenth-Century

Smith 47

Literature. 45. 3 (1990): 363-365. JSTOR. Web. 3 May 2015.

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School
Officers. Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Literacy in
History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects. National Governors Association
Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010. Web. 7 May
2015.
Proctor, Robert W. and Addie Johnson. Attention:Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks: SAGE
Publications, 2004. PDF file.
Prose, Francine. I Know Why the Caged Bird Cannot Read: How American High School
Students Learn to Loathe Literature. Harpers Magazine. Sept. 1999: 76-84. PDF file.
Rousseau, Jacques J. Emile, or On Education. Trans. Barbara Foxley. n.p., 1762. The Literature
Network. Web. 5 May 2015.
Willis, Scott, and Larry Man. Differentiating Instruction: Finding Manageable Ways to Meet
Individual Needs. Curriculum Update. ASCD, 2000. Web. 7 May 2015.
Wollstonecraft, Mary. A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. Boston: Peter Edes, 1792.
Bartleby. Web. 16 Mar. 2015.
---. Thoughts on the Education of Daughters: with Reflections on Female Conduct, in the More
Important Duties of Life. London: J. Johnson, 1787. Eighteenth-Century Collections
Online. Web. 16 Mar. 2015.