On September 29, 2026, Teachers Pay Teachers celebrated its 20th anniversary with an unprecedented 30% off sale. The higher powers at corporate emailed TpT sellers weeks before to allow us time to advertise this sale, offering to absorb the extra 10% discount for sellers. It was a joyful celebration of TpT: a teacher’s collaborative business idea that grew into a corporation valued at hundreds of millions of dollars.
Two days later, TpT sent out a shocking email to its sellers: premium memberships were going away in favor of new “exclusive” tiers of selling. I’ll get into the minutiae of the announcement in a moment, but there were two big headlines in the email. 1) Premium TpT sellers would earn less per sale. 2) Premium sellers were no longer permitted to sell resources through any kind of marketplace or membership other than Teachers Pay Teachers.
This is the story of how TpT encouraged teachers to become entrepreneurs, then accused us, implicitly, if not explicitly, of stepping out of bounds when we took those entrepreneurial skills beyond its own marketplace. It’s a story about a company built on teacher creativity, the changing relationship between a platform and the people who make it valuable, and what happens when the little guys discover that the rules of the game have changed.
A Brief History of TpT
Before I get into the new changes, here’s a quick history of TpT. Paul Edelman, a former public school teacher from New York, founded Teachers Pay Teachers in 2006. Edelman recognized how difficult it was for teachers to find quality resources, as well as how time-consuming and labor-intensive it was to create resources on our own. Edelman’s small platform allowed educators to upload resources, either free or for a price, for purchase by other teachers. By 2023, TpT had over 7 million resources listed and reported more than 1 billion downloads. In 2023, IXL Learning acquired TpT for an undisclosed sum. You might know some of IXL’s portfolio of websites, which include Rosetta Stone, Wyzant, and Vocabulary.com.
TpT is often called an Etsy for teachers for those outside of education, and that’s the easiest way to understand its model. Teachers create the products that attract buyers, while TpT provides the marketplace and collects a portion of each sale. In other words, the platform depends on the work of its sellers just as sellers depend on the platform to reach customers. What’s ironic is that a company built on teacher entrepreneurship is now asking its sellers to limit that very entrepreneurship.
The October 1 Announcement
The email describing the new exclusive seller membership explained that the following changes would be enacted:
- Premium sellers would continue to earn a higher payout rate over basic sellers. However, this rate would drop from 80% to 77.5%.
- Sellers must commit to selling digital educational resources exclusively on TpT.
To avoid misrepresenting any of TpT’s announcement, see a screenshot from their blog post explaining the changes below:
The new exclusivity clause denied premium, excuse me—exclusive, TpT sellers to sell digital educational resources on any website except TpT. See below for a screenshot from their blog post explaining the changes.
Basic vs. Exclusive Sellers
I actually didn’t get this email right away. Or, I should say I did, but I didn’t see it. I was on retreat with my sophomores at a camp in rural Wisconsin with very shaky internet access. While standing out in the rain with my students, I suddenly got several texts from my friend Heather, the seller behind It’s Lit Teaching. Heather knew I had been devoting much of my time the past few months to opening a digital storefront on my own website. She also knew that these new developments would essentially destroy these plans.
In the days that followed, TpT sellers were furious. Many TpT sellers treat their stores as ways to share some great lessons they’ve created. They see it as a means buy a few cups of a coffee a month, but not really a business exactly. And that is totally fine.
However, other sellers are more like me. Lit & More is the name of my store on Teachers Pay Teachers, but it also the name of my website, which costs hundreds of dollars each year to keep running. It’s also a registered LLC, one which I hoped might pay for my retirement one day. Like many bigger sellers, I have diversified my offerings on TpT over the years to allow purchases from my website. (This is also on the heels of TpT being banned in many school districts over lack of resource oversight and too much AI, something I’ll get into later.)
As I stood out in the rain and read the email, I began to absorb what this meant for my store. I, and many other TpT sellers, were screwed.
The Town Hall Forum & AI Announcement
On October 8, TpT hosted a town hall webinar to address the new terms of selling. These town hall sessions were common with sellers, but to be honest, I’ve never attended one. However, sellers showed up in droves for this one. Many, including myself, were holding out optimistic (and probably naive) hopes that TpT would backtrack on its announcement after seeing how it upset sellers on social media. But any hopes that TpT was operating in sellers’ best interests were dashed after that meeting.
The “town hall” session offered no chat feature and moderators did not take any questions. TpT reiterated its new policies briefly, then shifted to another new announcement. They decided it was time to address AI. Mind you, this was after years of losing credibility to AI-driven sellers and stores, including some embarrassing nationwide press on the abundance of AI slop.
IXL announced a new no-AI policy for TpT. I was puzzled, as this was not really what I considered the main objective of the webinar. What follows is a transcript of TpT’s plans with dealing with AI from the town hall webinar:
“Right, so what does this mean in practice? First, we’ll be making updates to our policy and the site to support and celebrate an AI-free TPT. You can expect to hear more from us in the next few weeks about how we’re approaching this change. In the meantime, generative AI should not be used to create images or text in resources or product listings on TPT. This includes resource files, cover images and thumbnails, preview files, or product descriptions.
Here’s what this means more immediately for you as a teacher author. First, please do not use AI-generated content in your products or listings going forward. Again, that’s inclusive of covers, thumbnails, previews, and descriptions, not just the resource files. Second, if you’ve already published AI-generated content in your existing resources and listings, please replace it with your own content.
We’re not out to get you. We’re not going to carelessly take action against proven stores. We are targeting the lowest quality resources that detract from TPT. We know it won’t be possible to remove AI in an instant, but we really do need all hands on deck for this, especially on those covers and thumbnails. Our data shows that buyers know AI when they see it, and they aren’t interested in purchasing it.
If you’ve used AI to represent your work, you may be hurting yourself more than you know. In the coming weeks, we’ll be adding an option to report low-quality AI resources to TPT. So if you’re browsing our site, and you come across something that’s clearly AI-generated and reflects negatively on the marketplace.“
I would be a fool not to mention the irony that the script announcing TpT’s new AI policy struck me as generic and formulaic—the very qualities that have frustrated many teachers about AI-generated content. I suspect AI was used to write it. (Of course, I have no way of knowing that for sure.)
As a seller and sometimes-buyer, this no-AI policy sounded just fine. Actually, as TpT had been promising they’d be rolling out this feature for years, I was annoyed that it is still being developed. I also wondered why this was the new focus of the meeting, when sellers were much more incensed about the exclusive seller policy.
“We Are the Villains Now”
It’s not hard to find stores that specialize in AI-created resources. I found one in about two minutes here. You can see the telltale signs of an AI-heavy store: a high volume of resources, relatively few followers, and thumbnails that appear to be AI-generated. Those characteristics alone don’t prove that the educational resources themselves were created with AI, but they illustrate why sellers have been asking for clearer standards and better ways to flag questionable content. Meanwhile, TpT’s town hall announcement promised a reporting option for low-quality AI resources in the coming weeks. As of this writing, I haven’t been able to locate that feature.
When the webinar offered no new information about seller terms and took no questions, I left with more questions than I started with. As days passed, I kept checking the news tab on Google to see if anyone was discussing the new exclusive seller model that TpT was trying. To my knowledge, it was the first time such a large marketplace demanded exclusive seller loyalty—especially years after forming.
Instead, I found several articles praising its new anti-AI policy. One website led with, “Teachers Pay Teachers, a popular online marketplace among teachers for classroom resources that critics say are sometimes of dubious value, plans to ban AI-generated resources from its site.” Another article got it completely wrong, claiming the seller petitions and reactions were formed after the announcement banning AI and not mentioning the new seller terms at all. You can read this erroneous reporting here.
From where I sat, the focus of the public conversation had shifted. Any news coverage I found highlighted TpT’s new AI policy, while the concerns sellers had raised about exclusivity and payout rates received little to no attention. I can’t know whether that shift was intentional, but it left many sellers feeling that their concerns were going unheard.
It only took a few days to determine what was happening. Premium sellers were being for the abundance of AI slop overtaking the website, despite many of us begging for more oversight as AI technology grew. Meanwhile, the conversation was shifting away from the new seller terms and toward TpT’s efforts to clean up its marketplace. The AI ban made for a much better headline than a policy requiring sellers to give TpT exclusivity while accepting less favorable earnings terms. And while the announcement generated positive press, the practical questions sellers had been asking remained unanswered—including how we were supposed to report AI-generated resources that violated the new policy. As of this writing, I still haven’t found a reporting feature that addresses those concerns.
How teachers are reacting
As more TpT sellers shared their frustrations online, several pulled the plugs on their stores immediately. One popular seller I follow has already deactivated all of her paid resources. Her store only offers free resources and has a large banner redirecting to her website where you can purchase paid resources. Others are seeking to create a new marketplace like TpT with more generous payout models and no exclusivity clause. Many sellers, especially smaller ones, are agreeing to the new exclusive terms (albeit, some more begrudgingly than others).
For two weeks, Instagram was flooded with posts and reels decrying the new exclusivity policy. And yet, no one seemed to be engaging except other sellers. It felt like, and still feels like, no one is listening.
Going forward
I was hoping that as I wrote this blog post/essay I’d feel more sure of what my next steps will be. On one hand, I’m furious with TpT for demanding 20%—wait, now 22.5%—of my digital earnings after twelve years of selling. I’m angry that I spent countless hours and dollars building a storefront on my website, which I will likely shut down if I accept their exclusive seller contract. I’m saddened by the business deals I’ve already had to hit pause on, and will likely never be able to pursue with this new exclusive model.
Ultimately, I’m disappointed. TpT was a model that uplifted people in a historically underpaid career and gave them a chance to be entrepreneurs. I discovered that gift in myself twelve years ago when I began Lit & More. TpT’s response feels misdirected. Sellers have been raising concerns about low-quality, AI-generated resources for years, and now the new policies place additional restrictions on sellers who have built legitimate businesses on the platform. I struggle to understand why those of us who have invested so much in TpT are being asked to shoulder these new costs and limitations.
However, I also feel backed into a corner. TpT accounts for 50-75% of my total earnings, including my teaching salary. I work in private education and will not get a pension; TpT is my retirement fund. To move to a basic sellership would be noble, but incredibly costly. To move to a basic seller tier allows me to sell elsewhere—but that would require that buyers follow me. And, in my experience after two months of selling offsite, buyers haven’t followed yet.
Short answer: I haven’t decided what to do yet. TpT has given us until December 31 to commit to a basic or premium level and I want to use that time to explore my options.
Parting Words
If you have any thoughts on the issue, I’d love to hear them. As of now, my small store on Lit & More is still open and its prices match what is offered on TpT. Based on my decision, this store may close or offer lower prices. I’ll update this post when I’ve made a decision.
I wish I knew how this story would end. Twelve years ago, TpT gave me an opportunity to turn something I loved doing into something that could support my family and my future. I’m grateful for that, and I don’t want to lose sight of it. But I also believe that teachers should be able to build businesses, explore new opportunities, and make decisions that are best for their own futures.
I don’t know what my next chapter will look like, but I hope it’s one in which teachers can continue to create, share, and earn a living from their work, without having to choose between the business they’ve built and the platform that helped them build it.
I discovered you through your blog writing on a topic I googled to try to better understand. I later followed you to TPT to buy some of your resources because your blogs had helped me. I didn’t actually even need the content I bought; I felt that I wanted to thank you for helping me think with your blog. I have since bought further content because what I purchased was of a very high quality. I wonder how many others discovered the blog first and followed you to TPT. I rarely go to TPT first, because I struggle to find quality resources that match what I am trying to do. I wonder how many others are like me. I would have followed you to a store on your website if I had known it existed. Given what I now know about TPT, I highly doubt I will be purchasing from them again. I would rather the money go to the teacher who is developing the quality curriculum.
I started teaching AP Lit 2 years ago and finding your resources made such a huge impact on my understanding of the class. Moreover, it has helped my students in ways I couldn’t have if I had to fumble in the dark for who knows how long while I figured it out. More than a TPT seller, I have mad respect for you as a person. Our department chair was an AP scorer last summer and I fan girled out when she told me she had the pleasure of meeting you. I say all that to say that regardless of what you decide, you will always have people like me who want to improve their instruction and will find your resources. Your resources were never short cuts or busy work like some other resources are. They have become the foundation of how I approach the class. I am sorry TPT’s under minded policies have disrupted your stability. That disruption could be the catalyst for change that propels you into a leap of faith that produces opportunities you never thought possible. I wish I knew what was going to happen. The only thing I do know is that your work has allowed me to think about the way I teach literature in ways that have been transformative. Whatever you decide to do, I am forever grateful for your work and your expertise. I will support you wherever you end up.
I’m shocked by TPT’s stance as someone who has spent as many years in publishing and content distribution as in teaching. No other selling platform asks for this kind of exclusivity on such a broad basis — not Amazon, not Etsy, not EBay, etc. Many sellers of digital or physical products on those platforms sell to other outlets AND have their own e-commerce website. Historically, many sellers have used those platforms as lead generation specifically for their own e-commerce. It’s a policy really on the edge of restraint of trade which would hinge on the intent being to fix prices or competition and I’m sure their lawyers would argue that no one has to a premium seller. That said, it is a really scummy practice, and I think less of TPT for implementing it.
It seems like the move of a business not making its metrics for the new owners. In a healthy business you would offer the sellers even more for such broad exclusivity, not couple it with rate cutting.
If it wouldn’t hurt the sellers, I would boycott them over this!
When I heard about this change from TPT, I thought it would hurt their business. I have purchased from you on at least 4 occasions, including during the 30% off sale. I have purchased from about 5 people on TPT and go there only for those specific people. Your resources are high quality and fit my students’ needs, so I will follow you wherever you next host your teaching resources. I was excited to hear about your new resale site because I know many schools don’t allow teachers to use TPT curricula. People will follow you from the AP Literature group, your cross-posts on Much Ado About Teaching, and your own blog posts. I am sorry that your creativity and resourcefulness are being attacked.