There should not be a problem to have students study the theory of evolution as by Darwin and others. However, they have to be taught two things: it is a theory and there is another theory "the creation". They can learn the latter from their religious sources. Charles Darwin, in his books (The Origin of Species 1859) and (The Descent of Man 1871), presented his theory of evolution. He presented the theory of the Mechanism of Natural Selection or survival of the fittest. More evolutionists contributed to the theory trying to deflect criticism. These are the common critics of the theory:
1- Basic material: Even if you are successful to trace the universe to one atom and life to one cell you will not be able to answer: who created the atom and cell. 2- The theory of "spontaneous generation", which asserts that non-living materials came together to form living organism has been rejected. The great evolutionists like Russian biologist Alexander Oparin and American chemist Stanley Miller experimented to prove that a living cell could originate by coincidence but failed and they admitted their failure. 3- The conditions required for the formation of cell are too great in quantity to be explained away by coincidences. The DNA molecule is so complex that it cannot be accidental or coincidental. 4- Lamarck and Darwin believed in the transferring of traits of one species to the other. They maintain that living creatures passed on the traits (new DNA) they acquired during lifetime to the next generation. Giraffes evolved from antelopes and bears transformed into whales. However, the laws of inheritance discovered by Gregor Mendel (1822- 1884) and verified by the science of genetics have nullified the theory of evolutionary mechanism. 5- Sharing the some of DNA material between animals point to a creator rather than spontaneous mutations (Neo-Darwinism). In humans spontaneous mutation as we study it in medicine result in disease and deformities not eloquent new species. 6- The fossil record theory of Darwin, which was a basic contention, has been rejected on scientific grounds. According to this theory, every living species has sprung from a predecessor. No "Transitional Forms" have yet been uncovered. On the contrary, the British Paleontologist, Drerk v. Ager in "The Nature of the Fossil Record" admits that the fossil records shows not gradual evolution but the sudden explosion of one group at the expense of another. This is just the opposite of Darwin's assumptions.
6- Man is the blend of Matter and Soul. Darwin and other evolutionists could deny it or ignore it but human observations are just too compelling even to intellectuals. For a scientific proof you need observation and experiment. There is no experiment that evolutionists can produce in the laboratory to prove their observation. Humans' observation is more stronger than the photos of some apes that looked more erect over millions of years. 7- The brain which is the most advanced in humans compared by any species is very difficult to explain how it can evolve from lower animals. We do not pass to our children through our sperms or eggs our knowledge, social or political skills. They have to learn it. Even intelligent people have to develop their brain more through learning. If they have intelligent children they will look like most of us. Learning will not cause us to evolve into new species or for our brains to grow into large balloons. Similarly, you can not expect lower animals to develop the sophisticated human brain by learning alone.
For me the theory of evolution is stuck in its beginning, middle and end. In the beginning: the origin of material!! in the middle: adding new DNA for acquired traits resulting in new species !! and in the end: human brains are just too sophisticated to evolve from lower animals. As you see the theory of evolution failed to evolve in these three essential steps. Compiled my thoughts with scientific facts from Islam And Darwinism: By: Prof. Maqsood Jafri.