I agree with that statement. It is precise, accurate and scientific. And, yes, the word matters. Doing so avoids the politicization of science which will serve both science and society better. Consider the Scopes trial definition of evolution. The court said as follows:
“Evolution, like prohibition, is a broad term. In recent bickering, however, evolution has been understood to mean the theory which holds that man has developed from some pre-existing lower type. This is the popular significance of evolution, just as the popular significance of prohibition is prohibition of the traffic in intoxicating liquors. It was in that sense that evolution was used in this act. It is in this sense that the word will be used in this opinion, unless the context otherwise indicates. It is only to the theory of the evolution of man from a lower type that the act before us was intended to apply, and much of the discussion we have heard is beside this case.”
Scientists have had entire careers studying evolution that has nothing to do with human evolution, common descent of species or long ages of the Earth. They need not change their correct use of language because nonscientists have loaded up the word with superfluous connotations.
Evolution in all contexts means change.
Biological evolution simply means change (in DNA) in populations. That is an easily observable fact that is best explained by the theory of natural selection of genetic variation.
Not all change in the DNA of a population is adaptive. But all change in the DNA of a population is, by definition, evolution. Adaptation implies the change is a useful change. Evolution just means it changed.