Opinion: Changing Typefaces Doesn’t Help People With Dyslexia. Here’s What Actually Does

The State Department’s recent reversal of a 2023 decision to switch from Times New Roman to Calibri revived a decades-old debate over whether certain typefaces improve accessibility, particularly for people with dyslexia. The idea is simple and appealing: Choose the right font, and reading becomes easier.

That idea is comforting. It is also wrong.

Dyslexia is not a visual disorder. It is a language‑based learning disability rooted in how the brain processes speech sounds and connects them to print. People with dyslexia struggle with foundational skills such as phonics and with reading fluency not because letters look confusing, but because written language does not come automatically.

For decades, peer‑reviewed research has tested whether fonts can meaningfully improve reading for people with dyslexia, and it is clear that they do not. Studies comparing so‑called dyslexia fonts with standard typefaces such as Times New Roman, Arial or Calibri show no reliable gains in accuracy, speed or comprehension. In some cases, unfamiliar fonts even slow readers down.

This does not mean presentation is irrelevant. Reasonable font size, spacing and contrast can make text more comfortable to read and reduce visual fatigue. But these benefits apply to everyone. They do not address the core difficulties that define dyslexia, and they should not be mistaken for evidence‑based solutions.

So why does the font narrative keep resurfacing?

Because it offers a visible, low‑cost response to a complex, invisible problem. It is a form of performative accessibility — easy to announce, easy to implement and easy to celebrate — while leaving the real barriers intact. Changing a font is simple. Teaching children to read using systematic, explicit instruction in phonemic awareness and phonics is not. Providing early screening, trained teachers and assistive technologies like audiobooks and text‑to‑speech requires time, money and political will.

Accommodations that actually help people with dyslexia, such as audiobooks, computer apps that read documents aloud and write by listening to students speak, or extended time are often necessary to help students stay engaged with grade-level content while they are learning. They preserve access and dignity in the classroom by providing students with the opportunity to show what they know without struggling.

Children with dyslexia also need explicit, systematic instruction to learn to read and write independently. When accommodations like those above replace teaching rather than support it, students are denied the very skills that would allow them to access text on their own. Genuine accessibility means providing both: access to content now, and the instruction needed for independence later. These are not cosmetic changes. They are structural ones.

New York offers a telling contrast. Last year, Gov. Kathy Hochul signed legislation creating a Dyslexia and Dysgraphia Center in the state Department of Education. The center will share best practices by setting standards for dyslexia screening in elementary schools, define evidence-based instruction, set expectations around teacher preparation and professional development related to dyslexia. The law is grounded in the science of reading and acknowledges dyslexia for what it is — a language‑based disability that has long been ignored and requires research‑aligned screening and specialized instruction for students as well as professional support for teachers, leaders and other school staff throughout New York state.

New York City’s NYC Reads initiative, launched under former Schools Chancellor David Banks and now continuing under Mayor Zohran Mamdani and new Chancellor Kamar Samuels, reflects the same understanding. By prioritizing curriculum quality, teacher training and evidence-based instruction, NYC Reads shifts the focus from symbolic gestures to systemic change. These reforms are harder, slower and far less photogenic than a font swap. They are also far more likely to work.

Crucially, strong instruction is a prerequisite for identifying dyslexia. When classroom reading instruction is weak or inconsistent, it becomes nearly impossible to distinguish between children who were poorly taught and those who have a language-based learning disability. Teachers cannot reliably find dyslexic students until high-quality, evidence-based instruction is in place for everyone. Accommodations for access to grade-level work must be accompanied by evidence-based instruction. That is why literacy and dyslexia advocates were delighted to hear the new chancellor announce that NYC Reads will be deepened rather than abandoned by the new administration. When all kids get strong reading instruction schools, it creates the conditions under which dyslexia can be identified early and addressed appropriately.  It allows for all children to thrive.

Policy reform changes how systems function; performative accessibility changes how documents look. The distinction matters and the stakes are high. Literacy is not just an academic outcome — it is a gateway to affordability, opportunity and dignity. People who can read fluently are better positioned to navigate housing applications, understand contracts, access health care, secure stable employment and participate fully in civic life than those who cannot. Teaching children to read well is not merely an educational goal; it is a commitment to a more equitable society.