I disagree. First of all, we're talking about highschool, so you have to allow for the fact that we're not going to dive arbitrarily deep into the details with

I disagree. First of all, we're talking about highschool, so you have to allow for the fact that we're not going to dive arbitrarily deep into the details with this audience. For most of these kids, this is probably the first and only serious conversation about he topic they've ever seen, and many of them starting from an antagonistic point of view (as was clear in the article). But is talking about Mickey incorrect in any substantial sense? No. The notion that there is a replication/inheritance stage and a death/selection stage is essentially correct and forms the core of the idea of evolution by natural selection. That "drawing" is the replication stage and Walt Disney's managerial decisions (and aesthetic appeal based on which Mickey people find more attractive) is the selection stage in place is, of course, artificial selection, but that just makes the lesson more general. If that's all these kids learn about evolution, that's fine. My only worry is that it puts Walt in the role of God, which plays into the hands of the creationists this teacher is trying to silence, but not that the essential ideas are wrong.