Evolution without accidents and also no intelligence?

I am sure chickens are conscious, and I'm fairly sure paramecia are too.

Can minds evolve in some way other than changing DNA? Only really if they step outside of the standard biological model. For example, Rupert Sheldrake postulates a variety of morphic fields that might achieve this. However in that case the morphic field is evolving via mechanisms that clearly have nothing to do with mutations of DNA because the fields are not considered to be physical at all.

My position, which I believe is in step with at least some of the 75+ scholars members of the The Third Way of Evolution, is minds change DNA /RNA/Ribosome communication systems, as much or more than their spelling changes minds.  They all are accomplished thinkers who are pragmatically changing the field of biology and reconstructing the science behind bio-evolution.

Do you agree that TTW of Evolution is outside of the metaphysics of "standard biological model".
https://www.thethirdwayofevolution.com/

 Even today, the general public, and many scientists, are not aware of decades of research in evolutionary science, molecular biology and genome sequencing which provide alternative answers to how novel organisms have originated in the long history of life on earth. This web site is dedicated to making the results of that research available and to offering a forum to expose novel scientific thinking about the evolutionary process. The DNA record does not support the assertion that small random mutations are the main source of new and useful variations. We now know that the many different processes of variation involve well regulated cell action on DNA molecules.

Genomes merge, shrink and grow, acquire new DNA components, and modify their structures by well-documented cellular and biochemical processes. Most of the scientists referenced on this web site have come to a wide range of conclusions about different aspects of evolutionary change. Many see evolution as a complex process with distinct mechanisms and stages rather than a phenomenon explainable by a small number of principles. The divergences and multiplicity of ideas, opinions and theories on this website are necessary since many fields of evolutionary biology remain relatively unexplored.

I strongly support the ideas of R. Sheldrake.  However, from what you said there is a misunderstanding.  A field is a physical object.  It is only to be considered as a part of physical theory.  It is almost like you imply that Sheldrake is woo, so his theory is non-physical.

 In physics, a field is a physical quantity, represented by a scalar, vector, or tensor, that has a value for each point in space and time.

That the spelling of DNA alone is "special" is only in chemistry, where the molecular structures and forces are measured without grey areas.  DNA/RNA/Ribosome communication systems are measured in messages communicated.  It's a probabilistic environment of measurement standards.

I am completely sure a paramecium processes measurable information.  I do not think it is self-aware to any degree.  I lived in the country for a little while.  My personal experience of the self-awareness of chickens, is pretty near zero, with an occasional individual who stands out.  But, if you mean that chickens have experience, yes, they are detecting their sensations.

Do you think that Shapiro and Noble experienced no backlash during their careers?  The just emerged because they are leaders in their fields of research.
from Wiki

 Noble's research focuses on using computer models of biological organs and organ systems to interpret function from the molecular level to the whole organism. Together with international collaborators, his team has used supercomputers to create the first virtual organ, the virtual heart.[17][18]

As secretary-general of the International Union of Physiological Sciences 1993–2001, he played a major role in launching the Physiome Project, an international project to use computer simulations to create the quantitative physiological models necessary to interpret the genome, and he was elected president of the IUPS at its world congress in Kyoto in 2009.[19]

Noble is also a philosopher of biology, with many publications in journals and books of philosophy.[20][21][22]
His books The Music of Life, Dance to the Tune of Life and Understanding Living Systems challenge the foundations of current biological sciences, question the central dogma, its unidirectional view of information flow, and its imposition of a bottom-up methodology for research in the life sciences.

3][