Yes she does. You teach evolution because it is science and you teach science in science class.
And to say that the theory of evolution is based solely on good science is a complete pot of phooey.... All one has to do is go back to the mid-1900’s where prominent evolutionists prescribed to the idea that evolution of life was no longer a theory, but it was a fact... and then these great minds added that they did not intend to get bogged down in semantics and definitions regarding evolution.
Darwinism (the basis of evolutionary theory) is based on the premise of natural selection which basically boils down to the bare claims that some organisms leave more offspring than others....however, the real guts of evolution — which is how do you come to have horses, tigers, and such— is outside of this mathematical theory. Looking further into the weaknesses of Darwin's theory is in explaining the origin of species... natural selection (the basis of Darwinism) does not play any role until self-reproducing organisms ALREADY exist. As an explanation for the origin of self-reproducing organisms, it is a non-starter.... I can go on and on about the enormity of holes and poor science that goes along with the “theory of evolution” just as I can regarding global warming. To say that evolution is a fact, is well... wrong.
Let me give you a reading list:”Uncommon Dissent: Intellectuals Who Find Darwinism Unconvincing” by William A. Dembski; “Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution” by Michael J. Behe; “From Darwin to Hitler, Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics and Racism in Germany” by Richard Weikhart; “The Design Inference: Eliminating Chance Through Small Probabilities” by William A. Dembski; “The Wedge of Truth: Splitting the Foundations of Naturalism” by Phillip E. Johnson.
Anthropogenic global warming is “science”.