Teaching kiddie QI (note: not QM) to get kids interested in studying science and math is a fine idea. The prerequisites needed for a deeper understanding at the high school level is not. Requirements are multivariable calculus, probability theory, sample theory, linear algebra and matrix theory, ordinary and partial differential equations, Fourier analysis, and advanced physics leading up to QM. Even if you start with very talented high school students that is years of schooling. A few very bright undergraduates will accomplish some of this, but some of these topics are taught at the graduate level, which is more years of schooling. Nor can we start students at a younger age, because most kids don’t develop the capacity for abstract thought needed for algebra, geometry, etc., until they are teenagers (I know this because I married a developmental psychologist).
TL;DR: Teach any deeper understanding of QM to high school student is preposterous; they simply are not ready for it.
Not sure what you read, because that article has nothing to do with ID. It’s a survey of how human engineering disciplines relate to biology, and how engineering can relate to systems biology. Nowhere is there any mention of an unknown and unknowable Designer doing any useful work. This is another fine example of the work of others being claimed for ID. IF the authors wanted to make any such claims, they would have put it in writing for the publication. Again, this is a reprehensible practice, and one of the reasons why no one in science takes ID seriously.
PS: Hindawi Publishing is a pay-to-publish house and has been accused of predatory practices. That doesn’t necessarily make it a bad paper, but it’s not off to a good start.
TL;DR: ID needs to do its work, rather than trying to steal from others.
AND here we see the reversal of burden of proof. Even ignoring the teaching religion in schools aspect, ID still has no patents, no inventions, etc… It doesn’t do any of the useful things that real science can do.
PS: Rather than arguing with people on the internet, why don’t you try submitting to a journal? Seriously - you’ve had a great deal of informal peer review here, I think you should take the next step.