Towards accessible Thai typography
A multi-dimensional analysis of typography practices in Thai elementary textbooks and implications for Universal Design
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17411/jacces.v16i1.635Abstract
This study examines Thai elementary textbooks on typography (Years 1–3) published by 11 different publishers, focusing on accessibility and inclusive design. The study analysed 198 textbooks using a Python script, revealing that traditional fonts comprised 75–85 per cent of the material in textbooks, and the font sizes range between 14 and 26 points. Publishers exhibited a systematic approach to font size across year levels, with sizes decreasing from Year 1 (16–26 points) to Year 3 (12–23 points). Mathematics and Thai Language textbooks displayed unique size disparities by employing significantly larger typefaces (18–40 points for Mathematics and 17–35 points for Thai Language) compared with other subjects. The implementation of smaller font sizes at 9 points creates major accessibility barriers which become particularly problematic due to the widespread occurrence of uncorrected visual impairments amongst Thai primary students. This study recommends implementing the universal design framework in setting the minimum font sizes and suggests developing frameworks that balance visual interest and readability. The study also recommends routine analysis of typographic decisions and their effects on learning outcomes facilitate the design of accessible, evidence-based education.
References
Abubaker, A. A., y Lu, J. (2012). The optimum font size and type for students aged 9–12 reading Arabic characters on screen: A case study. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 364(1), 012115. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/364/1/012115
Anwas, E. O., Afriansyah, A., Iftitah, K. N., Firdaus, W., Sugiarti, Y., Supandi, E., y Hadiana, D. (2022). Students’ literacy skills and quality of textbooks in Indonesian elementary schools. International Journal of Language Education, 6(3), 233–24, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1370193.pdf
Bessemans, A. (2016). Typefaces for children’s reading. TMG Journal for Media History, 19(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.18146/2213-7653.2016.268
Beymer, D., Russell, D., y Orton, P. (2008). An eye tracking study of how font size and type influence online reading. En People and Computers XXII Culture, Creativity, Interaction (HCI) (pp. 15–18). BCS Learning and Development. https://doi.org/10.14236/ewic/HCI2008.23
Bigelow, C. (2019). Typeface features and legibility research. Vision Research, 165, 162–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2019.05.003
Bohm, T. (2014). Letter and symbol misrecognition in highly legible typefaces for general, children, dyslexic, visually impaired and ageing readers. Information Design Journal, 21(1), 34–50. https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.21.1.05boh
Burgstahler, S. E. (2015). Universal design in higher education: From principles to practice (2.ª ed.). Harvard Education Press.
Dell, A. G., Newton, D. A., y Petroff, J. G. (2020). Assistive technology in the classroom: Enhancing the school experiences of students with disabilities (3.ª ed.). Pearson.
Demir, B. K., y Öztürk, B. (2024). Development of 21st century skills in the preschool period. En B. Aydınlı y B. D. Altunoğlu (Eds.), Transforming early childhood education: Technology, sustainability, and foundational skills for the 21st century (pp. 85–111). Özgür Press. https://doi.org/10.58830/ozgur.pub534.c2211
Halamish, V., Nachman, H., y Katzir, T. (2018). The effect of font size on children’s memory and metamemory. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Artículo 1577. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01577
Hughes, L., y Wilkins, A. (2000). Typography in children’s reading schemes may be suboptimal: Evidence from measures of reading rate. Journal of Research in Reading, 23(3), 314–324. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.00126
Kamollimsakul, S., Petrie, H., y Power, C. (2014). Web accessibility for older readers: Effects of font type and font size on skim reading webpages in Thai. En Computers Helping People with Special Needs (ICCHP 2014) (pp. 332–339). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08596-8_52
Katzir, T., Hershko, S., y Halamish, V. (2013). The effect of font size on reading comprehension on second and fifth grade children: Bigger is not always better. PLOS ONE, 8(9), e74061. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0074061
Ketmai, W., Khetanan, S., Wonthong, T., Suwanaprom, R., y Phetkarn, T. (2024). A vision survey of 1st level of primary school students in pilot schools in Nong Chok District, Bangkok, Academic Year 2024. Department of Health, Ministry of Public Health. https://mwi.anamai.moph.go.th/th/mwi-research/download?id=121012&did=28109
Masulli, F., Galluccio, M., Gerard, C.-L., Peyre, H., Rovetta, S., y Bucci, M. P. (2018). Effect of different font sizes and of spaces between words on eye movement performance: An eye tracker study in dyslexic and non-dyslexic children. Vision Research, 153, 24–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2018.09.008
Perea, M., Panadero, V., Moret-Tatay, C., y Gómez, P. (2012). The effects of inter-letter spacing in visual-word recognition: Evidence with young normal readers and developmental dyslexics. Learning and Instruction, 22(6), 420–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.04.001
Punsongserm, R. (2019). Thai universal design font versus familiar Thai text fonts: The role of distinctive letterforms and suitable inter-letter space influence in blurred words. En Heritage & Vision: The 2019 International Conference on Design for Experience and Wellbeing (pp. 143–202). Northwestern Polytechnical University. https://pure.tudelft.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/67548586/2019_DEW_proceedings.pdf
Punsongserm, R. (2020). Comparative effectiveness of homologous Thai letterforms on visual word recognition: Thai universal design font versus familiar Thai text fonts. Archives of Design Research, 33(3), 19–43. https://doi.org/10.15187/adr.2020.08.33.3.19
Punsongserm, R. (2023). Effectiveness of predominant letterforms in multi-viewing distances: Thai universal design font versus familiar Thai text fonts. Archives of Design Research, 36(4), 87–113. https://doi.org/10.15187/adr.2023.11.36.4.87
Punsongserm, R. (2024a). Effectiveness of predominant letterforms in different small type sizes: Thai universal design font versus familiar Thai text fonts. Journal of Accessibility and Design for All, 14(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.17411/jacces.v14i1.467
Punsongserm, R. (2024b). Comparing legibility of Thai Universal design typeface and Roman-like Thai typefaces using multi-viewing distance threshold [Conferencia]. 65th conference of Association Typographique Internationale (ATypI Brisbane 2024), Brisbane. https://atypi.org/presentation/comparing-legibility-of-thai-universal-design-typeface-and-roman-like-thai-typefaces-using-multi-viewing-distance-threshold
Punsongserm, R. (2026). Assessing legibility of Thai universal design typeface and Roman-like Thai typefaces across different viewing distances. Grafica, 14(27), 75–83. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/grafica.423
Punsongserm, R., Sunaga, S., e Ihara, H. (2017a). Thai typefaces (Part 1): Assumption on visibility and legibility problems. Archives of Design Research, 30(1), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.15187/adr.2017.02.30.1.5
Punsongserm, R., Sunaga, S., e Ihara, H. (2017b). Thai typefaces (Part 2): Criticism based on legibility test of some isolated characters. Archives of Design Research, 30(2), 23–45. https://doi.org/10.15187/adr.2017.05.30.2.23
Punsongserm, R., Sunaga, S., e Ihara, H. (2018a). Effectiveness of the homologous Thai letterforms on visibility under a simulated condition of low visual acuity. En Annual Conference of the 11th Typography Day (pp. 1–17). Industrial Design Centre (IDC). https://www.typoday.in/2018/spk_papers/rachapoom-punsongserm-typoday-2018.pdf
Punsongserm, R., Sunaga, S., e Ihara, H. (2018b). Effectiveness of homologous Thai letterforms presented in parafoveal vision. Information Design Journal, 24(2), 92–115. https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.00002.pun
Punsongserm, R., Sunaga, S., e Ihara, H. (2018c). Roman-like Thai typefaces: Breakthrough or regression? En ICDHS 10th + 1 Back to the Future / The Future in the Past (pp. 580–585). Universitat de Barcelona. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329335972_Roman-like_Thai_typefaces_Breakthrough_or_Regression
Punsongserm, R., y Suvakunta, P. (2022a). Optimal typeface and type size on Thai drug labeling and drug documentation: A recommendation for legal development. Archives of Design Research, 35(4), 49–71. https://doi.org/10.15187/adr.2022.11.35.4.49
Punsongserm, R., y Suvakunta, P. (2022b). Do the small Thai font sizes on drug labels and documentation facilitate Thai readers? A practical review. Archives of Design Research, 35(1), 51–73. https://doi.org/10.15187/adr.2022.02.35.1.51
Punsongserm, R., y Suvakunta, P. (2024). Enhancing accessibility through typography in Thai government mobile applications: Identifying issues and recommending inclusive guidelines for typefaces, type sizes, and color contrast. Archives of Design Research, 37(2), 25–57. https://doi.org/10.15187/adr.2024.05.37.2.25
Reynolds, L., y Walker, S. (2004). ‘You can’t see what the words say’: Word spacing and letter spacing in children’s reading books. Journal of Research in Reading, 27(1), 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2004.00216.x
Richardson, J. T. (2022). Younger and older readers. En The legibility of serif and sans serif typefaces (pp. 53–61). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90984-0_7
Sattabunjong, S. (2022). Cycloplegic refractive error survey of early school age in Khon Kaen. Mahasarakham Hospital Journal, 19(3), 189–195. https://he02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/MKHJ/article/view/258861
Tavakoli, E., y Kheirzadeh, S. (2011). The effect of font size on reading comprehension skills: Scanning for key words and reading for general idea. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1(7), 915–919. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.1.7.915-919
Tichnor-Wagner, A., Garwood, J. D., Bratsch–Hines, M., y Vernon–Feagans, L. (2016). Home literacy environments and foundational literacy skills for struggling and nonstruggling readers in rural early elementary schools. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 31(1), 6–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12090
Tincheva, N. (2023). ‘Narrative structure’, ‘rhetorical structure’, ‘text structure’: A conceptual complex meets text- and discourse world profiling shifts. English Text Construction, 16(1), 30–58. https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.21016.tin
Tinker, M. A. (1963). Legibility of print. Iowa State University Press.
Tulaganova, S. P. (2022). Artistic structure of the text. The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations, 4(12), 5–11. https://doi.org/10.37547/tajssei/Volume04Issue12-02
Uysal, S. A., y Düger, T. (2012). Writing and reading training effects on font type and size preferences by students with low vision. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 114(3), 837–846. https://doi.org/10.2466/15.10.11.24.PMS.114.3.837-846
Vongkittirux, S., y Ng-Pooresatien, W. (2008). Refractive error of primary-school children at Thammasat School. Thammasat Thai Journal of Ophthalmology, 3(1), 17–24. https://he01.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/eyesea/article/view/54470
Wang, T., y Ma, Y. (2024). The impact of font design based on cognitive psychology on reading experience. Economic Society and Humanities, 1(5), 75–80.
Wilkins, A., Cleave, R., Grayson, N., y Wilson, L. (2009). Typography for children may be inappropriately designed. Journal of Research in Reading, 32(4), 402–412. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2009.01402.x
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Rachapoom Punsongserm, Pittaya Suvakunta
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share or adapt the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. Use of the work for commercial purposes are not allowed.
- Authors are able to publish the journal's published version of the work in other media (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as far as they inform the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All of that fact. When publishing their work in other sources, authors must mention the name of the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All, its ISSN, the number and issue in which the article was published and a link to the main page of the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All. Optionally, they can also include a link to the article published in the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website), as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
