We report here on a study of the opportunities for creative reasoning afforded to first year undergraduate students. This work uses the framework developed by Lithner (2008) which distinguishes between imitative reasoning (which is related to rote learning and mimicry of algorithms) and creative reasoning (which involves plausible mathematically-founded arguments). The analysis involves the examination of notes, assignments and examinations used in first year calculus courses in DCU and NUI Maynooth with the view to classifying the types of reasoning expected of students. As well as describing our use of Lithner’s framework, we discuss its suitability as a tool for classifying reasoning opportunities in undergraduate mathematics course