The premature introduction and overuse of technology is damaging young children whose brains are not yet fully formed, according to Dr Aric Sigman, a psychologist and author.
As a result, the "nappy curriculum" – the statutory rules introduced in 2008 which dictate that toddlers should be introduced to computers as early as 22 months of age – is "subverting the development of children's cognitive skills".
Speaking to a conference of childcare specialists yesterday, the academic said children needed to use the three dimensional, real world to learn.
"There is evidence to show that introducing information and communication technology (ICT) in the early years actually subverts the very skills that Government ministers said they want children to develop, such as the ability to pay attention for sustained periods," said Mr Sigman.
"There is a conflict between multitasking and sustained attention. These things cannot and should not be developed at the same time. Sustained attention must be the building block.
"The big problems we are seeing now with children who do not read, or who find it difficult to pay attention to the teacher, or to communicate, are down to attention damage that we are finding in all age groups."
The controversial Early Years Foundation Stage, which sets dozens of learning goals for children from their first year to the age of five, says that computers should be introduced from 22 months and that from 40 months children should be able to "perform simple ICT functions, such as select a channel on the TV remote control and use a mouse and keyboard to use age-appropriate software".
Primary schoolchildren have at least one ICT lesson a week and computer use is widespread in other subjects.
Research evidence on the effect of ICT on children's learning, social development and health is mixed but the debate is becoming increasingly polarised.
In the US a number of studies show that age-appropriate software can bring benefits in areas like language development.
Other research suggests that prolonged television and computer viewing stunts brain development.
Mr Sigman said that while screen technology can be an important tool in learning, it should feature in schools much later than it does at the moment.
"It must be introduced and used judiciously at much later ages – ideally at least age nine – or it can subvert the development of the cognitive skills and curiosity it was intended to foster and enhance," said the author of Remotely Controlled: How Television is Damaging Our Lives.
"We risk infantilising the child's mind by spoon-feeding it with strong audio-visual sensations."
The psychologist dismissed arguments used by some academics and the education technology industry to justify exposing very young children to computer use.
"The rationale behind it is that children are interested in these things and that it is the world that children are growing up in. Therefore we must have them getting to grips with it at 22 months," he said.
"Children might be interested in alcohol, hand guns and pornography – that doesn't mean we should give them access to these things.
"Just because children are interested in something, it does not mean by any stretch of the imagination, that it is in their interests to expose them to these things.
"Children may well be good at using technology but monkeys can learn to use new technology, it is not necessarily something to strive for in itself."
The Qualifications and Curriculum Development Authority is responsible for advising and assessing schools on the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS). However the quango is set to be abolished.
The coalition government is reviewing which of its functions should be passed on to the Department for Education. Before the election, the Liberal Democrats said they would scrap the nappy curriculum.
Nick Gibb, the Conservative schools minister has described it as a "bureaucratic nightmare".
A Department for Education spokesman said: "No decision has been made yet on the future of the EYFS. Ministers are looking carefully at how best to strengthen the early years framework.
"We're clear about the need to cut bureaucracy to free-up front line professionals in supporting young children's development."