The Leninist pedagogy has at least three permanent sources of inspiration: It is in the first place the great revolutionary’s life itself, secondly the tremendous wealth of ideas contained in his writings, and thirdly the pedagogical aspect of his activities. Our article deals primarily with the influence exerted by Lenin’s work on leading Czech educationists. The first of them was Otokar Chlup, whose works were often based on, and inspired by Lenin and his ideas. Apart from Comenius, it was just Lenin, in whom Chlup found support for his theory of the basic subject-matter of the curriculum. Recalling Lenin’s famous speech at the 3rd Congress of the Komsomol, where Lenin condemned cramming and formalism, Chlup underlined the necessity of determining the basic subject-matter, which would have to be carefully selected, to do justice to the dialectic interdependence of things and to be developed progressively. In this concept Chlup saw a way to shaping the scientific world outlook of dialectical materialism. Lenin’s views of education were systematically and synthetically summed up for the first time in our country by J. Vaňa. In addition, he deduced from the Leninist concept of education also the need to extend the subject of pedagogy vertically (to cover the adults) as well as horizontally (to include various forms of educational influences out of school). A penetrating confrontation of the bourgeois and the socialist concept of education from the positions of Leninism was presented by K. Galla, who arrived at the conclusion that there were the following basic characteristic of the socialist educational system: it is democratic, on a mass scale, close to life, all-round, scientific, polytechnical conscious, progressive. The second part of the article brings a survey of the main stages in the development of the Czechoslovak socialist school. Its principal milestones are the basic Party resolutions of 1951, 1955, 1959 and 1964, which provided a basis for the gradual implementation of the Marxist-Leninist line of educational policy emphasizing the democratization of education, its scientific content, the application of concret pedagogical principles, the development of polytechnical education, modernization of the teaching process, and a differentiated approach to the capacities and interests of children. In conclusion of the article it is pointed out, that V. I. Lenin can also serve as an example of a practical educationist and propagandist, who was able to speak and write intelligibly and convincingly even about complex questions. Therefore this aspect of Lenin’s activities also deserves being systematically studied by educationists.