On the basis of a broad survey of world comparative literature the study deals with the methodological problems of comparative pedagogy, and aims at acquainting the Czechoslovak pedagogical public with the problems involved and arrive at certain conclusions in the analyses of a number of problems of comparative study in pedagogy. The study brings, in the first place, a brief history of comparative pedagogy. Its development is characterised by the contribution of Marc-Antoine Jullien, the period of pedagogical travels, the establishment of pedagogical museums and international centres of pedagogical documentation, the works of M. Sadler and finally the works of the present generation of comparative educationists. In the chapter devoted to the main theoretical problems of comparative pedagogy the author analyses first of all the way of applying the comparative method in pedagogy and thus comes to explaining the terms foreign pedagogy and comparative pedagogy, descriptive and explicative comparative pedagogy and educational policy (or even training for international understanding). Then he goes on to deal with the question of what is the object of comparison in comparative pedagogy and thereby tries to define roughly the content and extent of the term ≫comparative pedagogy≪. The core of the study is an analysis and classification of the main conceptions of present-day comparative1 pedagogy in the world. Here, the author distinguishes especially between the so-called intrapedagogical analysis on the one hand, and historically and sociologically conceived comparative pedagogy on the other hand. He endeavours to clarify this conception more profoundly especially in the works of P. Rosselld, I. L. Kandel, N. Hans, F. Schneider, J. Lauwerys, C. A. Andersen, A. M. Kazanias and E. J. King. In conclusion, he also refers to the development of comparative pedagogy in the socialist countries. Then the author analyses the substance and the technique of the comparative method in pedagogy. He especially appraises its contribution to scientific work in pedagogy, analyses its individual stages and steps, and critically appreciates the possibilities of using the questionnaire and statistical methods in comparative pedagogy. Finally he analyses and evaluates various views on the position of comparative pedagogy in the system of sciences, and tries to give a true picture of its significance. In conclusion of his study the author advocates consistent development of comparative pedagogy in Czechoslovakia and outlines the main tasks of comparative pedagogical studies in his country. In this respect he especially calls for developing the methodology of comparative pedagogy on the basis of dialectical and historical materialism, developing one’s own comparative studies in the field of the most urgent practical and educational problems of Czechoslovak pedagogy, and an appraisal of domestic tradition in the field of comparative pedagogy. In this connection he voices the demand that comparative pedagogy should be studied at Czechoslovak universities.