Introducing exampling: A communicative strategy behind students’ use of examples in mathematical argumentation

Empirical justification schemes - often viewed as an epistemological limitation or instructional shortcoming - are pervasive in student argumentation. This study offers the term exampling to describe a previously unnamed phenomenon: the strategic use of examples in mathematical arguments rooted in students’ awareness of audience and shaped by their mathematical identities. Drawing on frameworks of positional and relational identity, we explore how students choose to include examples in ways that reflect their perceptions of authority, ability, belonging, and communicative purpose. Through a mixed-methods study involving written justifications and clinical interviews with undergraduate students, we found that exampling functions as a deliberate tool for supporting clarity in argumentation and adhering to perceived norms. These findings underscore that exampling is not merely an instructional artifact but a socially embedded, identity-driven practice. Recognizing this new construct calls for a shift in how educators interpret and respond to students’ argumentative choices.