What should be taught is reading writing and math. Biology should be inroductory which is describing life in all its forms and the differences and commonalities.
Good biology curricula have been around for decades and the new agenda driven liberal curricula should be avoided at all costs and the basic introductory issues kept. It's worked well and we have had the most advanced science in the world in the US without the obsessive focus on evolution.
I find this a reasonable argument, although I don't really understand your point. The only obsession I see with evolution is by those who oppose teaching it. I doubt if high schools spend more than a few days on evolution. If they do, it's to counter the opposition.
Which leads me to the problem I have with your posts. I am aware of no hypothesis that stands as an alternative to evolution. By hypothesis, I mean an explanatory framework that is consistent with all scientific knowledge and which offers a focus and direction for research.
Yes. There really can't be one. It also would be evolution. Science can't address supernatural things.