I was amazed to see that you didn't take the opportunity Ichneumon gave you to back off this absurd statement.
C'mon even trained, working scientists focusing their career on a restricted field (never mind something as broad as "evolution" in toto) often struggle to keep up merely with incremental additions to the evidence relevant to their research.
Yet you want students in high school, or maybe even earlier, to be presented with "ALL" the evidence? In one (or a few) years, in one class (that has to cover many other things as well)?!
Again, how is this even possible? Oh, and you obviously want them to genuinely consider the evidence, not just be presented with it. This means they have to understand it. Which means they will need to have deep knowledge of multiple scientific fields, knowledge of technical terms and professional shorthand, etc. Which means they wouldn't need an INTRODUCTORY science class in the first place!
Seriously, now. Don't you see how silly this is?
Pole-vaulting over mouse tirds now are we? I didn't mean "ALL" in the literal sense. I meant a review of the basic tenets of course. My central point remains. What are you, some sort of pedantic coxcomb?