http://www.newsobserver.com/news/education...p-8597996c.html

"Mentors often struggle to find time for their advisory roles, even with a $1,000 incentive to take on the extra duty, when they're juggling full-time teaching jobs. Some schools have too few teachers with the experience and training to mentor the long rosters of newcomers."

The article discusses full time mentors which makes the program more costly. What if teachers in their fifties had the option of semi-retirement? They would retain health insurance and benefits. Mentor on a part-time basis or "circuit ride" among districts in a state where help is needed, organize inservices or teacher retreats etc. The idea here is to release the mentor from the grind of full time teaching and allow them to do creative projects to help support new teachers. Maybe the costs of mentors in semi-retirement would be substantially less than full time mentors. It might also make more teaching positions available for teachers just out of college.

I like your idea of part time mentors.

Taking that role away from a full time teacher will only be a good thing.

I'm aware of some districts offering a "buy out" for teachers to take an early retirement. Might part-time mentors bring a better return on investment in human resources than a "buy out"?

For teacher retention rates it will be a good thing and save on human resource costs. I would not mind seeing school districts use this idea first before they go with a full "buy out" proposal.

I do not think every teacher will do the "part time" Mentor thing though.

Absolutely not. For teachers that are really burned out, the "buy out" is a better option for everyone. One thing that irks me about educators is the inclination to turn a good idea into a bad idea by making it mandatory. Mentoring should always be an option.

Given how expensive health insurance is these days, the school district continuing to pay a share of health insurance would be an attractive incentive.