Which brand is best?

About this Collection

What do I want to find out?

The criteria pupils use to assess a range of companies, producers and organisations whose products or services they may buy.

What do I need?

  • Cards with logos – one set for each group of pupils.
  • Red and blue pens.
  • A recording sheet for each group.

What do I do?

Timing: 25 minutes + discussion time

  • Give each group of pupils a set of cards with a selection of brand logos. Here are some suggestions to choose from, the logos can easily be found online:

  Coca-Cola, Nestlé, McDonalds, Lidl, Divine, Cafe Direct, Starbucks

  Lego, Disney, Adidas, Nike, Gucci, H&M, GAP, Audi, Toyota, Shell,

 United Nations, European Union, Red Cross, Oxfam, Amnesty International,

Children in Need, Recycling, Peace/CND, Fairtrade, Olympics, Forest Stewardship Council,

Apple, Google, Microsoft, FairPhone, Nokia, Facebook, Twitter, etc

  • Ask each group to sort the logos into those they recognise and those they don’t. From now on they will only work with the logos they are already familiar with.
  • Record which ones these are e.g. with a photograph.
  • Ask pupils the following question: “Which brand is best and which is worst?” Explain that they should rank the brands from the one they like most to the one they like least. Ask the pupils to mark the ‘dividing line’ that separates the brands they feel positive about from those they feel negative about. They should reach a consensus, and record their results.
  • On the recording template they should write the brands they feel positive about in blue and those they feel negative about in red, giving each brand a ranking and justification to explain its positioning – if time is short ask them to complete the justification for the most and least liked brands, plus those next to the dividing line.


Ranking Justification of position
  • In groups pupils could discuss the following and feedback to the class – or use the questions as a basis for whole class discussion. If possible keep a note of pupils’ comments yourself, or ask a colleague/volunteer to be notetaker.

            Which brands did you agree on? How do you feel about them?

            Which brands did you not agree on? Why?

            How did you reach a consensus about where to mark the dividing line?

            What makes you choose certain brands?

You could prompt with:            

             Advertising? Cost? What’s fashionable? Design? Ethical? Green?


How do I analyse the results?

  • Collate the recording sheets from all the groups, noting the number of times each brand appears at the top, middle (dividing line) or last in the rankings.


Number of times in top 3 Number of times in the middle


Number of times

in last 3


  • The activity examines the pupils´ knowledge of and attitude towards companies that offer commercial products or services and not-for-profit organisations. In justifying their rankings of the companies and organisations behind the logos note the number of times each of the following were mentioned: price, value, celebrity endorsement, advertising, design, impact on the environment, working conditions of employees, ethos/policies, etc.
  • Do pupils know and relate to both commercial brands and to not-for-profit services? To what extent do they support them? Do they consider where he goods are produced, the impact of production on the environment, the working conditions of the producers (directly employed or outsourced) and the ethos of the company e.g. towards the issue of child labour?

How do I measure the change?

  • Depending on the time between first and second audit, either repeat the activity with the same logos or use a range of ones not previously discussed.
  • Compare the recording sheets and look for change in both the rankings and the justifications. Are pupils more aware of their responsibilities as consumers and of campaigns for ethical trade such as the Clean Clothes Campaign and Fairtrade?
  • Look for an increase in awareness of the impact of each step along the supply chain – on the environment, and on producers.