The research is aimed to show the significance of Technology (Handicraft lessons) competitions and olimpiads (academic competitions) among general education institutions pupils of the Republic of Tatarstan. The authors note the efficiency of these activities as the diagnostics means and improvement of natural gifted children and teenagers.

Methods. The applied methods involve criteria approach to the giftedness types assessment; generalization of the advanced pedagogical theory and practice, supervision, teachership surveys and discussions with them.

Results. The experience of Technology competitions and olimpiads (academic competitions) implementation among school pupils of Kazan Federal University, Elabuga Institute is described. The research outcomes show that pupils participation in such activities not only contributes the creative potential realization but also forms sustainable interest to engineering-technical and design activities that subsequently influence a graduates’ choice of high-demand majors (specialities) and professions at the contemporary labour market. Additionally, the authors emphasize the objective necessity of specific teachers’ training, and formation of necessary professional skills set for successful work with gifted pupils.

Scientific novelty. The research identifies a number of criteria for diagnostics of giftedness types. It is specially noted that the most important point of this phenomenon is propensity to work as the primary factor of ingenuity and talent.

Practical significance. Implementation of the research outcomes can be used for further development of Technology competitions and olimpiads implementation among school pupils in high vocational education institutions that are qualified at students’ training on pedagogic majors, as well as in supplementary education establishments for children and teenagers.

1. Babaeva Yu. D. Dinamicheskaya teoriya odarennosti [Dynamic theory of giftedness]. Osnovnye sovremennye koncepcii tvorchestva i odarennosti. [Basic modern concepts of creativity and giftedness]. Moscow: The Young Guard. 1997. Р. 275–294. (In Russian)

2. Gilbuh Yu. Z. Vnimanie: odarennye deti. [Note: the gifted children]. Moscow: Znanie [Knowledge]. 1991. 79 p. (In Russian)

3. Lejtes N. S. Vozrastnaja odarennost i individualnye razlichija: izbrannye trudy. [Age giftedness and individual differences: selected works]. Moscow; Voronezh: Publishing House of the psycho-social institution; MODEK, 2003. 464 p. (In Russian)

4. Panov V. I. Nekotorye teoreticheskie i prak¬ti¬ches¬kie aspekty odarennosti [Some theoretical and practical aspects of giftedness]. Prikladnaja psihologija. [Applied psychology]. 1998. № 3. Р. 33. (In Russian)

5. Rabochaja koncepcija odarennosti. [The working concept of giftedness]. Moscow: Master, 1998. 68 p. (In Russian)

6. Ryzhenkova S. G. Odarennost shkolnika: pedagogicheskie i psixologicheskie aspekty problemy [Gifted student: pedagogical and psychological aspects of the problem]. Vestnik Novosibirskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta. [Novosibirsk state pedagogical University Bulletin]. 2012. № 4. P. 12–17. (In Russian)

7. Savenkov A. I. Odarennye deti v detskom sadu i shkole. [Gifted children in kindergarten and school]. Moscow: Academy, 2000. 232 p. (In Russian)

8. Yudin V. V., Skvortsova Yu. V. Pedagogicheskie podxody k razvitiyu odarennosti [Pedagogical approaches to the development of giftedness]. Yaroslavskij pedagogicheskij vestnik. [Yaroslavl pedagogical Bulletin]. 2008. № 3 (51). P. 48–54. (In Russian)

9. Heller K. A. Perspectives on the diagnosis of giftedness // German Journal of Psychology. 1989. № 13. P. 140–159. (Translated from English)

10. Merzon E. E., Panfilov A. N., Panfilova V. M., Shterts O. M. The Multifactor Pedagogical Model of the Development of Giftedness in Children and Youth. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research. 2013. № 16 (12). P. 1694–1699. (Translated from English)

11. Merzon E. E., Shterts O. M., Panfilov A. N. Comparative Analysis of Development of Technical Giftedness of a Person Depending on its Engagement into Specialized Educational Environment. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research. 2013. № 16 (12). P. 1686–1689. (Translated from English)

12. Merzon E. E., Shterts O. M., Shatunova O. V., Panfilov A. N. Sex-age dynamics of development of technical giftedness signs. Life Science Journal. 2014. № 11 (6). P. 539–542. (Translated from English)

13. Renzulli J. S. Guiding the gifted in the pursuit of real problems: The trans-formed role of the teacher. The Journal of Creative Behavior. 1983. № 17 (1). P. 49–59. (Translated from English)

14. Torrence E. P. Growing up creatively gifted: a 22-year longitudinal study. Creative child and adul quatery. 1980. № 5. P. 148–170. (Translated from English)

15. Treffinger D. J., Isaksen S. G. Creative Problem Solving: The history, development and implications for gifted education and talent development. Gifted Child Quarterly. 2005. № 49. P. 342–353. (Translated from English)

16. Heller K. A. Perspectives on the diagnosis of giftedness. German Journal of Psychology. 1989. № 13. P. 140–159. (Translated from English)