Lesson 5.1 is a mastery studio that turns Lesson 5’s individual work into a collaborative clinic. Rather than writing stories in isolation, learners bring a small slice of their backlog into the room and treat it as material to be examined, tested, and refined with peers.

Each learner selects a handful of their highest-priority stories and acceptance criteria from Lesson 5, including a short note about how each story connects to the product vision and key stakeholders from their ecosystem map. This becomes their “clinic backlog”—a focused set of items that feel both important and slightly unfinished.

Presenting the Backlog Slice

In small groups, learners take turns presenting their backlog slice. For each story, they briefly restate the product vision, name the primary user or stakeholder, read the story and its acceptance criteria, and explain why this item sits near the top of their backlog. Peers listen first for alignment: does the story sound like an authentic expression of the vision and ecosystem work from Lessons 3 and 4?

Presentations are short and focused. The goal is not to defend every detail, but to make the thinking legible enough that peers can help strengthen it.

Stress-Testing With INVEST & Guided Questions

After each presentation, the group turns to stress-testing. Using INVEST as a shared language, they ask questions such as: “Is this story small enough to complete within a sprint?”, “Is it clearly testable from the user’s point of view?”, and “Does it describe value or just implementation?” Peers also raise realistic constraints and scenarios from their own contexts.

Guided prompts support this process:

• “What would happen to this story if your budget or team capacity shrank by 30%?”
• “If a new stakeholder pushed for a different priority, would this story still hold its place?”
• “Could you split this story into two or three smaller ones without losing the core outcome?”

By walking through these scenarios, learners discover whether their stories are robust or brittle and where refinement is needed.

Refining Stories, Criteria, and Priorities

Learners then move from critique to design. Based on feedback, they revise story wording to better name users and outcomes, adjust acceptance criteria to be more observable and testable, and sometimes break large stories into smaller, more independent slices.

They also look across their backlog slice as a whole: does the current ordering of stories still make sense given what they have heard? Are there stories that should move up or down in priority because of new insights about risk, value, or dependencies? This step emphasizes that the backlog is not only a collection of good stories, but an ordered expression of strategy.

Articulating a Mastery Narrative

To close the studio, each learner writes a short narrative describing their refined backlog slice. They explain how the top stories connect to the vision, which stakeholders are served, what trade-offs they are making in their current ordering, and how they will know if this slice has successfully moved the product forward.

This narrative becomes both a mastery artifact and a rehearsal for real-world conversations with teams and leadership. It reflects not only their ability to write stories, but their capacity to think and speak like a Product Owner who can align vision, stakeholders, and delivery.

Mastery for Lesson 5.1

A learner demonstrates mastery of Lesson 5.1 when they can present a coherent backlog slice tied to their product vision and ecosystem, invite and incorporate peer feedback using INVEST, revise stories and acceptance criteria to address clarity and value issues, and articulate why their chosen ordering represents a strategic way to move the product forward.

In a single sentence, mastery sounds like: “I can bring a small backlog slice into a clinic, stress-test it with peers, and emerge with sharper stories, stronger acceptance criteria, and a more intentional ordering that reflects my product vision and stakeholders.”