How to Tell When a School Device Is No Longer Worth Repairing

For school district IT teams, deciding whether to repair or replace a device is rarely straightforward.

On one hand, districts want to extend device lifespan and control costs. On the other hand, sinking time and money into devices that won’t reliably return to service creates hidden costs: staff time, lost instructional days, and repeated repairs.

This guide helps school IT leaders determine when a device is no longer worth repairing, using practical criteria that balance cost, safety, and long-term value.

Why Repair vs. Replace Decisions Matter in K-12

In large 1:1 environments, small decisions scale fast. Repairing the wrong devices too long can lead to:

• Higher long-term costs than replacement
• Increased downtime and student disruption
• IT staff burnout from repeat fixes
• Inconsistent device reliability across classrooms

Having clear retirement criteria removes guesswork and keeps decisions defensible.

1. Device Age and Remaining Lifecycle

Even a successful repair doesn’t reset the clock.

As Chromebooks age, districts must weigh not just whether a device can be repaired, but whether it should be, given its remaining supported lifespan.

Key factors to consider include:

• How many years the device has been in active service
• Whether it’s approaching the district’s planned refresh or replacement window
• If replacement parts are becoming harder or more expensive to source

For Chromebooks specifically, lifecycle decisions are closely tied to Google’s Auto Update Expiration (AUE). Once a device reaches its AUE date, it no longer receives regular OS updates or security patches, making it increasingly difficult to justify continued investment.

To help districts extend usability, Google offers Long-Term Support (LTS) and Long-Term Channel (LTC) options, which provide a more stable update cadence for certain models. These channels can be valuable for schools that prioritize consistency and testing stability, but they do not extend a device’s AUE date or overall security support window.

Bottom line:

If a device is approaching the end of its supported lifecycle, even with LTS or LTC in place, continued repair spending rarely makes long-term financial or operational sense. Proactively aligning repair decisions with AUE timelines helps districts avoid over-investing in devices that are already nearing retirement.

2. Repair Cost vs. Replacement Cost

The first question to ask:
Is the repair cost approaching, or exceeding, the value of the device?

A common rule of thumb many districts use:

• If a repair costs 75-80% or more of replacement value, replacement should be considered

This isn’t universal, but it’s a useful starting point, especially for older devices nearing refresh cycles.

When evaluating cost, include:

• Parts and labor
• Shipping and handling
• Internal IT time
• Likelihood of additional repairs

If a device has already required multiple major repairs, future failures are more likely.

3. Performance No Longer Meets Classroom Needs

Even functional devices can become impractical.

Signs a device may no longer be worth repairing:

• Slow performance that impacts testing or daily use
• Incompatibility with required software or platforms
• Inability to support updated security or management policies

For iPads, Apple notes that battery health and aging hardware affect performance over time:

• iPad battery and performance overview:
  https://support.apple.com/guide/ipad/understand-ipad-battery-usage-health--ipadcda46da7/ipados 

If performance issues persist after repair, continued investment may not be justified.

4. Safety Concerns (Non-Negotiable)

Some issues should immediately remove a device from service.

These include:

• Swollen or damaged batteries: battery swelling is one of the most serious issues seen in Chromebooks and iPads. Swollen batteries can warp housings, lift screens, and in rare cases pose fire or injury risks. These devices should be powered down immediately and serviced or replaced without delay.
• Signs of overheating or thermal failure: devices that become excessively hot during normal use, shut down unexpectedly due to temperature, or emit unusual smells indicate internal failure that should not be ignored.

• Liquid intrusion with internal corrosion: while minor spills are often repairable, devices showing corrosion on internal components, especially near the battery or logic board, can become unpredictable and unsafe to operate over time.

Apple and Google both emphasize that battery damage and internal failures present legitimate safety concerns and should be addressed promptly:

• Apple battery service guidance:
  

• Chromebook swollen battery guidance:
  https://support.google.com/chromebook/thread/159902660/swollen-chromebook-battery?hl 

If a device poses a safety risk, repair is not optional.

5. Model-Wide Failure Patterns and Compounding Issues

A single repair doesn’t automatically mean a device should be retired, but consistent failure patterns across a specific device model are a major red flag.

In K–12 environments, IT teams often discover that certain Chromebook or laptop models develop known, repeat failure points over time. These aren’t isolated incidents tied to individual student use, they’re systemic issues built into the model itself.

Common warning signs include:

• A high volume of the same repair across the same model
• Widespread failure of a specific component (motherboards, trackpads, keyboards, etc.)
• Devices repeatedly cycling through repair despite successful fixes
• Repair costs adding up with no long-term reliability improvement

When a model develops a documented history of repeat failures, continuing to repair it often results in escalating costs, increased downtime, and frustrated IT teams. At that point, replacement becomes the smarter long-term strategy, not because the device is broken today, but because it’s unlikely to stay reliable tomorrow.

Key takeaway:
If a device model has a known, widespread failure pattern, repairing individual units rarely solves the underlying problem. Identifying these trends early helps districts avoid sinking time and money into devices that will continue to fail at scale.

6. Operational Impact on IT Teams

In many cases, the deciding factor isn’t the condition of the device, it’s the strain placed on IT teams.

Certain device models or repair types can quietly consume far more time and resources than they’re worth. When repairs repeatedly pull technicians away from higher-priority work, slow down district-wide initiatives, or create backlogs during peak periods, the operational cost becomes significant.

Common signs include:

• Disproportionate technician time spent on the same devices or models
• Delays to critical projects like testing support, onboarding, or refresh cycles
• Repair backlogs that grow during predictable high-volume periods

At district scale, these hidden labor costs add up quickly. Even when individual repairs appear affordable, the cumulative impact on staffing, turnaround times, and service levels can outweigh the value of keeping the devices in circulation.

In these situations, replacement is often the more cost-effective and operationally sound choice, freeing IT teams to focus on work that keeps classrooms running smoothly.

7. Data Security and Compliance Considerations

Older devices may struggle to meet current security standards.

Consider replacement if:

• The device no longer receives OS or security updates
• Management controls are limited or outdated
• The device cannot reliably support district data protection policies

Many districts align device lifecycle decisions with broader security guidance such as the NIST Cybersecurity Framework:

• NIST Cybersecurity Framework overview: https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.800-124r2.pdf 
  

Security gaps are often a stronger justification for replacement than hardware condition alone.

Creating a Clear Repair vs. Replace Framework

Many districts benefit from formalizing criteria such as:

• Maximum repair cost threshold
• Maximum number of major repairs per device
• Age or AUE cutoff
• Safety and compliance exclusions

Clear guidelines:

• Speed up decision-making
• Improve consistency
• Support budget planning
• Make replacement decisions easier to justify

How iTurity Helps Districts Make Smarter Repair Decisions

iTurity works with K-12 IT departments to evaluate devices objectively, helping districts decide which devices are worth repairing and which should be retired.

Districts partner with iTurity to:

• Assess repair viability at scale
• Avoid unnecessary replacements
• Reduce repeat repair cycles
• Extend device lifespan where it makes sense

The goal isn’t to repair everything, it’s to repair the right things.

Final Thoughts for School District IT Leaders

Not every broken device should be fixed. And not every aging device should be replaced.

The key is having clear, defensible criteria that balance cost, safety, performance, and operational impact. With the right framework, and the right repair strategy, districts can protect budgets, reduce downtime, and keep technology working where it matters most.

Need help determining which devices are worth repairing and which aren’t?
iTurity supports school districts with repair and evaluation services designed specifically for K-12 environments.