Tzvi Daum suggests replacing Rashi with Rashbam, or more broadly speaking drash for pshat. I agree with the dangers of presenting drash as pshat, especially when the drash is difficult to except at face value. However, the suggestion to study chumash without Rashi is far too drastic.
I hope I am not speaking out of fear of change, but rather out of an authentic connection to Torah and tradition. Rashi is so basic to studying chumash and has been so for generations. Along with the importance of modifying the way we teach to make it more suitable to the current student, there is a competing value of connecting the student to the way chumash has always been taught. Change is important in moderation and can be integrated only within the context of a proper balance between the competing values mentioned above. Not teaching Rashi, in my humble opinion, is tipping the scales too far and disturbing that delicate balance.
It would be preferable to teach chumash with Rashi, while giving the student an appreciation of what Rashi does and why. This would enable the student to distinguish between pshat and drash, without depriving him of Torah knowledge that has been so basic for generations.
bvracha,
Yair Kahn