Considering Bad Education is 'just' a sitcom and therefore not typically expected to have complex characters and plot lines, I think the writing and casting of the series was and remains fantastic. Not only is there witty and well-delivered dialogue, as mentioned in other reviews, but it touches on sensitive issues in an admirable way. Let me expand on this, because it is debated hotly and largely disputed, especially for this show.
Bad Education is called 'puerile' by a few reviewers online due to its rather rude humour. OK, this is a fair point... but it's well-written humour, even if a lot of it is dirty, and the majority of it is extremely funny. Even the clichéd jokes are delivered and inserted in new ways and the few that aren't still work in the context of the show. If someone was wanting highbrow humour, they shouldn't have chosen a sitcom: the way the humour is written is, yes, 'puerile', but it is funny and it works.
In addition to this, the characters each start stereotypically clichéd: this is another point reviewers touch upon in a negative light. But, again, in the context of the sitcom, they are lovable and well-written and consistent, which makes the show. And, even though they START stereotypically (eg. camp gay boy, clever Asian girl, class clown, etc.) they develop throughout the course of the show and develop personalities and hobbies and show sides that you wouldn't expect (eg. the tough bully turns out to be gay) and stereotypes are merged in new ways (eg. class clown turns emo/Gothic). On top of this, it is never explicitly mentioned, but it is implied that we, the audience, are seeing these kids through Mr Wickers' eyes and therefore are accompanying them on the journey of HIM seeing them develop from just cardboard cutout characters in a class he's got to control into real people who respect him and whom he respects. In episode 1 in the parents' meeting, he mentions their talents as aspects of them that nobody else notices, showing he notices and respects them as people - not just learners - and this is reflected in the last scene in season 3.
Other good points include the facts that: -Parents match up to their children, psychologically, in appearance, and are (except for the movie... sorry Mrs. Poulter) kept consistent even when in the background. I am especially impressed with the psychological accuracy in the portrayal of the parents and their children. Examples include Stephen Carmichael's ability to be confident and open, matched up to Mr and Mrs Carmichael and their acceptance of their son's personality and sexuality, and also Frank Grayson's mother, whose neglectful and abusive relationship with her son versus the pampering of her dog explains the constant need for her son to assert dominance alongside his need to hide his soft side and 'true self'.
-The morals are admirable and repeated: even though the humour is dirty and Wickers himself does not shy away from doing ridiculous and immoral things to reach his end goals, morals consistently include 'be yourself: you will be richly rewarded' (such as in Grayson's transformation from bully to confident and proud boyfriend of Stephen), 'people are people not just stereotypes' (each character is complex and respected and liked by the end of the series by every other character), 'things are illegal for a reason', 'sexuality is nothing to be ashamed of' and 'immaturity can be overcome'.
-Scenes are reflected subtly to show growth throughout the series, one particular example being (credit to the Tumblr user who brought this up) the first and last lines of each character being meaningful and summing up the character in question. Grayson's first and last lines towards Stephen are 'Hi ugly' and 'You look amazing'.
-Plus, representation is very inclusive: there are main characters who are disabled, from a large section of ethnicities, strong female characters meeting the Bechdel test (Gulliver and Pickwell talk to each other quite a lot about various issues), and there are multiple and complex queer plot lines which are not trivialised or made into a joke and get their own happy endings... mostly.
So, yes. Bad Education could be called 'immature' and 'puerile'... but it really isn't...
Bad Education is called 'puerile' by a few reviewers online due to its rather rude humour. OK, this is a fair point... but it's well-written humour, even if a lot of it is dirty, and the majority of it is extremely funny. Even the clichéd jokes are delivered and inserted in new ways and the few that aren't still work in the context of the show. If someone was wanting highbrow humour, they shouldn't have chosen a sitcom: the way the humour is written is, yes, 'puerile', but it is funny and it works.
In addition to this, the characters each start stereotypically clichéd: this is another point reviewers touch upon in a negative light. But, again, in the context of the sitcom, they are lovable and well-written and consistent, which makes the show. And, even though they START stereotypically (eg. camp gay boy, clever Asian girl, class clown, etc.) they develop throughout the course of the show and develop personalities and hobbies and show sides that you wouldn't expect (eg. the tough bully turns out to be gay) and stereotypes are merged in new ways (eg. class clown turns emo/Gothic). On top of this, it is never explicitly mentioned, but it is implied that we, the audience, are seeing these kids through Mr Wickers' eyes and therefore are accompanying them on the journey of HIM seeing them develop from just cardboard cutout characters in a class he's got to control into real people who respect him and whom he respects. In episode 1 in the parents' meeting, he mentions their talents as aspects of them that nobody else notices, showing he notices and respects them as people - not just learners - and this is reflected in the last scene in season 3.
Other good points include the facts that: -Parents match up to their children, psychologically, in appearance, and are (except for the movie... sorry Mrs. Poulter) kept consistent even when in the background. I am especially impressed with the psychological accuracy in the portrayal of the parents and their children. Examples include Stephen Carmichael's ability to be confident and open, matched up to Mr and Mrs Carmichael and their acceptance of their son's personality and sexuality, and also Frank Grayson's mother, whose neglectful and abusive relationship with her son versus the pampering of her dog explains the constant need for her son to assert dominance alongside his need to hide his soft side and 'true self'.
-The morals are admirable and repeated: even though the humour is dirty and Wickers himself does not shy away from doing ridiculous and immoral things to reach his end goals, morals consistently include 'be yourself: you will be richly rewarded' (such as in Grayson's transformation from bully to confident and proud boyfriend of Stephen), 'people are people not just stereotypes' (each character is complex and respected and liked by the end of the series by every other character), 'things are illegal for a reason', 'sexuality is nothing to be ashamed of' and 'immaturity can be overcome'.
-Scenes are reflected subtly to show growth throughout the series, one particular example being (credit to the Tumblr user who brought this up) the first and last lines of each character being meaningful and summing up the character in question. Grayson's first and last lines towards Stephen are 'Hi ugly' and 'You look amazing'.
-Plus, representation is very inclusive: there are main characters who are disabled, from a large section of ethnicities, strong female characters meeting the Bechdel test (Gulliver and Pickwell talk to each other quite a lot about various issues), and there are multiple and complex queer plot lines which are not trivialised or made into a joke and get their own happy endings... mostly.
So, yes. Bad Education could be called 'immature' and 'puerile'... but it really isn't...