I don't think this is a fair comparison. If you want to teach that you can write(2) to raw FDs in Rust, you can, just like you can use write(2) or fprintf(3) in C.
C has a standard library which students should understand even though it's making system calls deep down. Rust has a standard library which students should understand even though it's making system calls deep down (in fact, sometimes through the host C library).
I certainly see the value in knowing C and Unix and that was my education over two decades ago as well. But I also watched many people quit computer science altogether because they struggled with heisenbugs with C pointers. If they could have been kept on track by Rust compiler errors and higher level abstractions, maybe they would still be in the industry today, learning whatever else they needed instead of quitting in their first semester.
C has a standard library which students should understand even though it's making system calls deep down. Rust has a standard library which students should understand even though it's making system calls deep down (in fact, sometimes through the host C library).
I certainly see the value in knowing C and Unix and that was my education over two decades ago as well. But I also watched many people quit computer science altogether because they struggled with heisenbugs with C pointers. If they could have been kept on track by Rust compiler errors and higher level abstractions, maybe they would still be in the industry today, learning whatever else they needed instead of quitting in their first semester.