Part of the issue here is how "evolution" is taught and addressed specifically towards students. The word itself is used much too broadly instead of how it was intended, "descent with modification." Most don't even try to teach evolution it's simply tossed out without any attempt to truly engage the students and this is for a multitude of reasons the primary is a real lack of knowledge among the teachers and the fear of the Pandora's box that could potentially be opened by doing so. That in and of itself is a causative problem and rests squarely on the shoulders of scientists and teachers.As usual, its most strident opponents endeavor to separate evolution from adaptation. Evolution is the result of adaptation. Evolution is a theory with (literally) mountains of direct evidence, gathered over centuries, to back it up. Its opponents are usually either too ignorant, too blinded by religion, or too lazy to evaluate the evidence for themselves and so depend on the word of others who are likewise either too ignorant, too blinded by religion, or too lazy to evaluate the evidence for themselves.As usual, its most strident advocates confuse evolution with adaptation. The former is a tidy theory with no direct evidence to back it up, whereas the latter is easily observable and replicated.
One of the scientist/teacher caused problems is associating evolution with the origin of life. Evolution IS NOT a definition of the origin of life nor can it explain it, they are two completely different subjects so stop equating the two. Evolution also DOES NOT negate the possibility of divine design except to those on both sides who I will call "fundamentalists" for lack of a bettor descriptor.
You wish people to understand evolution? Teach it for what it is not what many wish it to be and be understanding of natural human resistance fed by lack of information, misinformation and wishful thinking on ALL sides.