Seats at the Table

Seats at the Table was CSU Political Review’s answer to the same problem every student government election runs into: candidates give speeches, students scroll past them, and nobody actually talks to anybody. Here’s the format, laid out so anyone running a candidate event could borrow it.

The setup

• Small round tables instead of a stage, each seated with two candidates and a rotating group of students.
• Three rounds, roughly 25 minutes each.
• At the start of each round, candidates get two minutes to introduce themselves and their platform.
• The floor then opens to student questions for the rest of the round.
• Between rounds, the room reshuffles: no student sits with the same candidates twice, and no candidate hides behind a podium.

Ground rules, read aloud before round one

• Be honest and respectful.
• Participate fully and make space for others.
• It’s okay to disagree, but do so with curiosity, not hostility.
• Give your full attention to whoever’s speaking; no side conversations.

The facilitator’s job

Mostly restraint. Keep questions concise, make sure everyone who wants to ask gets a turn, and gently cut off anyone, candidate or student, running long so the table can hear from others. If a table goes quiet, that’s the only time to step in: pivot to a question from the bank below or push deeper on whatever topic is already on the table.

Question bank, for when conversation stalls

DEIA

A note on this category: DEIA is a contested term, and reasonable people land in different places on it. These prompts were included as neutral, open-ended questions, not as an endorsement of any particular framework or policy position. The goal at every table was the same regardless of topic: let students raise what matters to them and let candidates answer for themselves.

• What alternative approaches could the institution take to foster inclusivity and equity?
• How can these efforts go beyond surface-level initiatives and create lasting change?
• What role does accessibility play, physically and digitally?
• How can these initiatives benefit everyone rather than just specific groups?

Affordability

• What role should the institution play in addressing student housing affordability?
• How can it better support students facing housing insecurity?
• What concrete steps can it take to make itself more affordable?

Student Life & Success

• What additional resources should be offered to support student success?
• How can advising improve to help students stay on track?
• What role should the institution play in post-graduation success?
• What can be done to make campus safer?

The format did what a stage never could: it forced candidates to answer in real time, in front of a small enough group that a dodge was obvious, and it gave students a version of “meet the candidates” that actually felt like meeting someone.

← Back to CSU Political Review