“…This not only concerns 'its emphasis on a neatly linear progression through a fixed set of benchmarks', but also that 'it diminishes variation in the motivation for pursuing STEM courses and the range of experiences they may offer' (Cannady, Greenwald, & Harris, 2014, p. 448). The metaphor homogenises people and stages (Vitores & Gil-Juárez, 2016), and fails to capture the particular cultural and contextual elements of study experiences of students from underrepresented groups (Espinosa, 2011;Mendick, Berge, & Danielsson, 2017;Ong, 2005). Furthermore, the inclination to homogenise leads to an insufficient awareness of the point that both the identity variables and what counts as STEM can be constructed in various ways when analysing quantitative data (Metcalf, 2014).…”