Session 12: A1 Peer Review & Submission

Block 1: Advanced Strategy, Funnel Mapping & The A1 Deck

View lecture slides: Session 12 Slides

1-Hour Lecture (Theory & Strategy)

Why peer review beats self-review: you are too close to your own sandbox to see gaps a fresh reader spots immediately (missing KPI, vague risk, unrealistic budget).
Structured critique framework: for each of the 4 rubric criteria, reviewers write one “keep,” one “cut,” and one “fix” — not general praise.
Investment-committee framing (used again at the Phase 2 capstone in Session 24): reviewers should ask “would I fund this?” not “is this well-formatted?”
Recap the full rubric here: A1 Grading Rubrics.

flowchart TD
    EX[Exchange A1 decks] --> RV[Score 4 rubric rows 0-5]
    RV --> KCF[Keep / Cut / Fix per row]
    KCF --> SW[Swap back and discuss]
    SW --> REV[Revise deck]
    REV --> CHK{Final self-check}
    CHK -->|KPI, mitigation, 100% budget| SUB[Submit A1]
    CHK -->|gaps remain| REV

Figure 1: A1 peer review and submission workflow

Key Concepts in Depth

Good feedback is specific, actionable, and tied to a criterion. “Looks good” and “needs more detail” are neither. The Keep/Cut/Fix format forces specificity:

Keep: the strongest element, so the author does not accidentally remove it.
Cut: something that adds length but not value.
Fix: a concrete gap, with a suggested remedy.

Score each rubric row 0–5 before writing comments; scoring first stops reviewers from being swayed by design polish. The investment-committee question (“would I fund this?”) moves the review from formatting to substance: is the problem real, is the plan credible, is the budget justified, are the risks controlled?

When receiving feedback, do not defend; ask clarifying questions, then pick the two changes with the biggest effect on the rubric score.

Worked Example: Pathshala Tutors (Running Case)

A reviewer scores the Pathshala A1 draft:

Rubric row	Score (0–5)	Keep	Cut	Fix
Problem/Opportunity Insight	4	Funnel table with the 8.3% leak	Generic Nepal internet statistics slide	Add the source for the SOV count
Funnel & Channel Plan	3	Capture/Create split	Duplicate funnel diagram	Give SEO a measurable KPI
Budget & KPI Rationale	2	Bottom-up logic	—	The Meta CPL of NPR 300 has no source; label it as an assumption to test
Risks & Compliance	4	Minor-data consent row	—	Name an owner for each mitigation

Total: 13/20. The two highest-value fixes are the budget assumption (likely +2 points) and the SEO KPI (likely +1 point). Removing the statistics slide shortens the deck without losing any marks.

1-Hour Lab (Agency Execution)

Pair up. Exchange A1 decks (or screen-share).
Reviewer scores each of the 4 rubric rows 0–5 and writes one keep/cut/fix per row (15 minutes).
Swap back, discuss the toughest critique out loud (10 minutes).
Revise your deck based on the two most valuable pieces of feedback (25 minutes).
Final self-check: does every KPI have a number, does every risk have a mitigation, does the budget total 100%?
Submit your finalized Assignment A1: Campaign Strategy Deck.

Common Mistakes

Giving praise or criticism without pointing to a rubric row.
Commenting on fonts and colours while missing an unsupported budget.
Trying to apply every comment at once; prioritise the two with the biggest effect.
Submitting without the final checks: every KPI has a number, every risk a mitigation, and the budget totals 100%.

Deliverable: Assignment A1 — Submitted

Campaign Strategy Deck is complete. This unlocks Block 2, where your channel plan becomes an actual content calendar and ad asset library.

Summary

Structured peer review scores each A1 rubric row, then writes one keep, one cut and one fix per row. Reviewers take the investor’s view (“would I fund this?”). Authors revise the two highest-impact gaps and run a final check before submitting.

Key Takeaways

Score first, comment second.
Keep/Cut/Fix makes feedback specific and usable.
Judge substance (would I fund it?) before style.
Fix the gaps that move the score most.

Review Questions

Short answer

Why should a reviewer score the rubric rows before writing comments?
Give one example each of a “keep”, a “cut” and a “fix” comment.
What three items belong in the final self-check before submission?

Applied (case) questions

Your deck receives 2/5 on Budget & KPI Rationale with the comment “numbers unclear”. Write three specific questions you would ask the reviewer, and the changes you would make.
Act as an investment committee member: list four questions you would ask before approving an NPR 25,000 monthly budget.

Session 12: A1 Peer Review & Submission