Increasing numbers of school children are suffering from bad backs because of ill-fitting chairs, a report says.

The laws that ensure teachers get appropriately sized chairs and desks do not apply to pupils, who can sit for long spells on uncomfortable furniture.

Instead pupils’ furniture is chosen because it is the cheapest available, says a report by former English education secretary Charles Clarke.

Many school chairs were designed for the bodies of children of the 1960s.

Also, children are spending an increasing amount of time in front of computers in schools.

Mr Clarke’s report for the British Educational Suppliers Association on what is needed to improve the future education system said: "Sitting for extended periods on chairs that are of inappropriate size and that lack ergonomic design, and at desks or tables whose height relative to the chair is incorrect and will be uncomfortable.

"The Back Pain Association is convinced that schools are a significant source of back problems."

It said schools had paid little attention to buying ergonomic furniture for children, with the main consideration being the "lowest unit price".

Research dating back to the 1990s suggests the size measurement on which most children’s furniture was based on the average size of children in the 1960s, when they tended to be shorter.

However, sizes have been updated by manufacturers and the report urged ministers to ensure the greater use of adjustable furniture in the new schools that are being built under England’s school rebuilding programme.

‘Astronomical cost’

It did however acknowledge that it would not be practical for schools to fill their classrooms with resized products.

Mr Clarke’s report said: "Our children are likely to be spending thousands of hours of their school lives on chairs and at desks and tables where their posture is poor and the potential for damage to backs is great."

Back pain is one of the most common reasons for absence from work and its treatment by the National Health Service, cost to employers and the public purse is "astronomical", it added.

The report also called for computer technology to play a "full and seamless part" in supporting pupils’ personalised learning.

The Conservatives revealed figures showing 1,500 suspensions of children aged four and under in the past year.

In response, heads’ leader Mick Brookes says it reflects teachers’ fears that they could lose their jobs if they intervene to stop violent pupils.

As such teachers are using suspension powers instead, says Mr Brookes.

Teachers were worried by a culture of litigation and the fear of unjust accusations, said Mr Brookes, and as such they opted to use procedures to exclude violent toddlers.

‘Shocking’

"The culture we have in our schools now means that every time they lay hands on a child to restrain them from hurting themselves or others, they put their jobs on the line," said Mr Brookes, general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers.

"You would be surprised by the vehement language and the violence that comes in with very young children these days, it’s quite shocking," Mr Brookes told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

The figures obtained by the Conservatives showed 580 fixed-term exclusions of five-year-olds, 300 of children aged four and 120 of those aged three, for attacking another pupil, data shows.

There has been a steady rise in temporary exclusions at primary schools, while permanent exclusions have fallen.

Primary school permanent exclusions - published in June - were down to 980 compared with 1,540 in 1997.

There were 45,730 fixed term exclusions (suspensions) in 2006/7, compared with 43,720 in 2004/5 and 41,300 the year before.

This is the first year that the government has given a breakdown of the reasons for suspensions among various ages of primary school children.

The data shows there were 890 exclusions of five-year-olds for assaulting an adult, along with 420 of four-year-olds and 140 of three-year-olds.

In total, there were more than 4,000 fixed-period exclusions handed to children aged five and under.

The figure for those aged four and under is 1,540, the majority of whom were four (1,140).

The exclusions relate to a very small proportion of the primary school population.

Disruptive

For example, in the case of children aged four who were suspended, if it is assumed the figure of 1,140 relates to individual children, it represents about 0.2% of the pupils in that age group in England’s schools.

The data showed that there were 10 suspensions of five-year-olds for bullying, and a further 20 for sexual misconduct.

But there were 1,000 suspensions of under-fives for persistent disruptive behaviour.

The statistics were obtained through a parliamentary question by shadow schools secretary Michael Gove.

"Teachers need the powers to maintain order in the classroom and clamp down on bad behaviour before it escalates into violence," said Mr Gove.

"Ministers have eroded teachers’ ability to keep order by restricting their powers to deal with disruptive and violent children."

The government insists schools do have the power to take action against children behaving badly - and that this data shows they are doing so.

Heads’ powers

A DCSF spokesman said: "It is very difficult to see what argument is actually being presented here. Of course heads have the power to permanently exclude pupils where necessary but we are also helping schools to turn around poor behaviour before it reaches this stage

"Violence in the classroom, at any age, is not acceptable and teachers have the power to take appropriate action against young children involved in such acts - and these figures show that they are doing that.

"It’s important to remember though that behaviour in the vast majority of schools is good most of the time and a recent survey of teachers showed that around nine in 10 felt that behaviour in their school was satisfactory or better."