Intelligent design: a hypothesis.
Evolution: a theory.
Scientifically, both belong in the classroom. BUT it should be made clear that the above is the truth. In addition, neither concept has been introduced as a law, according to the scientific method. That should also be made clear.
However, the theological implications of intelligent design is largely a humanities issue and we'd be robbing children of a proper education if we didn't at least discuss them in classes that touch on theology.
Scientifically, both belong in the classroom. BUT it should be made clear that the above is the truth. In addition, neither concept has been introduced as a law, according to the scientific method. That should also be made clear.
ID does not even rise to the level of a hypothesis. A hypothesis requires specific testable criteria. ID does not have that. IS is, at best, a philosophical idea and has nothing to do with science.
In science, Laws are essentially another word for theories. For example, Newton's Laws of Motion are the basis for the physics taught in high school. These Laws are flawed and have been disproven by relativity. There is solid, observed evidence that shows Newton's Laws don't work but there is no observed evidence that Evolution doesn't occur. Why are Newton's disproven theories being taught without issue, but Evolution is such a sensitive matter?