The language of educational innovations as “praxema”: Semiotics of urban environment transformations in the concepts of “city-university”
DOI: 10.23951/2312-7899-2026-3-9-31
The study emphasizes that the contemporary development of territories (cities) and universities, driven by the technocratic logic of efficiency and innovation, generates the risk of losing the human dimension. The aim of the research is to develop and test a methodology of comparative semiotic analysis of educational innovations as a tool for transforming the urban environment within the “city-university” concept. The relevance of the work is determined by the dominance of the technocratic paradigm in the interaction between universities and cities, which creates the risk of a “humanitarian deficit” — the loss of human subjectivity and its meaning-forming role in education and urban development. The theoretical basis of the study is the concept of the “praxema” (S.S. Avnesov) and the approach of G.N. Prozumentova, which emphasizes the phenomenon of “personal presence” and the overcoming of the anthropological deficit through the subjectivization of education. The methodological foundation of the study is the information-synergetic approach (I.V. Melik-Gaykazyan), based on the substantiation of the following propositions: 1) the phenomenon of information is an irreversible process; 2) the information process is a mechanism of self-organization; and 3) semiotic forms are the results of stages of the information process. One of the results of this approach was the concept of “semiotic diagnostics” (I.V. Melik-Gaykazyan), the procedures of which make it possible to resolve the problem of measurement in the humanities. The method used is a humanitarian (linguosemiotic) expertise, including discourse analysis and comparative analysis of two cases: Tomsk (Russia) as a historical university center and the Lanzhou New Area (China) as a project for creating a “university-city” from scratch. The material consisted of official narratives and self-descriptions representing educational innovations in these territories. The results of the study showed that the language of educational innovations in both cases functions as a praxeme — an active tool for constructing reality. Universal traits were identified: the university is universally positioned as a “hub,” “driver,” and “bridge,” which visualizes its new active role in the city. Culturally specific differences manifested in the ways of overcoming the “humanitarian deficit.” In Tomsk, the language of innovations (narrative “guardian of traditions and the engine of the future”) is aimed at preserving the humanistic mission of the classical university and rooting innovations in the historical and cultural code. In Lanzhou, the metaphor of the “scientific-educational oasis” and the frames of integration of education and production construct a new identity for the territory and strive to overcome the alienation of the individual from education by including them in solving real development tasks. The study proves that the language of educational innovations is a critically important factor and indicator of the humanitarian quality of transformations within the frameworks of “city-university” concepts. Its analysis not only allows for diagnosing current changes but also for predicting their anthropological consequences, opening perspectives for managing the development of territories not only as technological but also as truly human, meaningful spaces. The proposed tool — humanitarian expertise — allows moving from measuring quantitative effectiveness indicators to analyzing the deep anthropological effects of educational innovations and identifying risks of symbolic dehumanization in “city-university” concepts. Expanding the interpretation of educational innovation to include artificial intelligence infrastructure makes it possible to present universities as active semiotic agents that not only introduce technology into the urban environment, but also create new anthropological meanings in it, thereby overcoming the humanitarian deficit of technocratic development.
Keywords: educational innovations, concept of “semiotic diagnostics,” semiotics of the urban environment, city-university, humanitarian expertise, anthropological deficit, Tomsk, Lanzhou New Area, artificial intelligence in education
References:
Abakumova, N. N., & Fakhrutdinova, A. V. (2026). The humanitarian component of the Moscow International Ranking “Three missions of the university”: a comparative analysis of higher education institutions in Russia and China. In Scientific Research of the SCO Countries: Synergy and Integration: Proceedings of the International Science Conference (pp. 58–66). https://doi.org/10.34660/INF.2026.48.34.044
Abakumova, N. N., & Savitskaya, I. S. (2025). Innovatsionnye izmeneniya nauchno-obrazovatel’nogo prostranstva vuza v kontekste postneklassicheskoy nauchnoy paradigmy [Innovative changes of the scientific-educational space of the university in the context of the post-non-classical scientific paradigm]. In N. N. Abakumova et al. (Eds.), Metavselennaya inoyazychnogo obrazovaniya: priblizhaya budushchee [Metaverse of foreign language education: approaching the future] (pp. 15–47). Tomsk State University.
Bekebayeva, M., Kelesbayev, D., Orazova, B., Demesinova, A., & Mukhamedkhanova, A. (2024). The University Perception in the Context of University – City Interaction and Its Management. Qubahan Academic Journal, 4(3), 832–839.
Caughman, L., Keeler, L. W., & Beaudoin, F. (2020). Real-Time Evaluation of City–University Partnerships for Sustainability and Resilience. Sustainability, 12(21), 1–18.
Clark, B. (2004). Sustaining Change in Universities: Continuities in Case Studies and Concepts. Open University Press.
Dun, Y. C., & Li, Z. H. (2025). Instrumental Difficulties of Technical and Humanistic Education and Their Solutions. Southern Plus, 5(3), 15–23. https://www.nfnews.com/content/mom4WRzQ6V.html
Garomssa, H. (2025). The entrepreneurial university concept as a narrative of change in HEIs. Studies in Higher Education, 50(2), 365–386.
Goddard, J., & Vallance, P. (2013). The University and the City. Routledge.
Gorbulyova, M. S., Lushnikova, A. A., Pervushina, N. A., & Teterin, A. Y. (2025). Vyyasnenie zaprosa na kharakteristiki obrazovaniya v menyayushchikhsya usloviyakh: postanovka zadachi [Clarifying the demand for characteristics of education in changing conditions: problem statement]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya, 88, 260–271. https://doi.org/10.17223/1998863X/88/23
Gorbulyova, M. S., Melik-Gaykazyan, I. V., & Pervushina, N. A. (2020a). Initsiativy pedagogicheskoy bioetiki [Initiatives of pedagogical bioethics]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii, 6, 122–128.
Gorbulyova, M. S., & Pervushina, N. A. (2020b). Bioeticheskoe izmerenie sotsial’nogo zaprosa na kreativnoe obrazovanie [Bioethical dimension of the social demand for creative education]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya, 58, 278–282. https://doi.org/10.17223/1998863X/58/26
Guangming Daily Editorial Department. (2025, August 12). Problems and Transformation of the Humanities in Universities. Guangming Daily, 5–12. https://m.toutiao.com/group/7537430609870799410/?upstream_biz=doubao
Itskovits, G. (2010). Troynaya spiral’: universitety–predpriyatiya–gosudarstvo: innovatsii v deystvii [Triple helix: universities–enterprises–state: innovations in action]. Tomsk State Unniversity sistem upr. i radioelektroniki.
Lun, Y. M. (2025). Technocratism: Criticism and Approval. Theoretical Channel, 2(7), 1–8. http://theory.people.com.cn/BIG5/n1/2017/0220/c40531-29091874.html
McNeill, D. (2024). Urban Geography III: Universities and Their Spaces. Progress in Human Geography, 51(3), 123–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/03091325231188375
McNeill, D., Mossman, M., Rogers, D., & Tewdwr-Jones, M. (2022). The University and the City: Spaces of Risk, Decolonization, and Civic Disruption. Environment and Planning A, 54(1), 204–212.
Melik-Gaykazyan, I. V. (1998). Informatsionnye protsessy i real’nost’ [Information processes and reality]. Nauka, Fizmatlit.
Melik-Gaykazyan, I. V. (2013). Semioticheskaya diagnostika: sposob izmereniya egoizma vlasti [Semiotic diagnostics: a way to measure the egoism of power]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta, 137(9), 255–261.
Melik-Gaykazyan, I. V. (2015). Volshebstvo dlya Zolushki: o protsedure izmereniy v gumanitarnykh issledovaniyakh [Magic for Cinderella: on the procedure of measurements in humanities research]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii, 11, 144–149.
Melik-Gaykazyan, I. V. (2022). Semioticheskaya diagnostika rasshchepleniya traektoriy mechty o proshlom i mechty o budushchem [Semiotic diagnostics of the splitting of trajectories of the dream of the past and the dream of the future]. Elektronnyy nauchno-obrazovatel’nyy zhurnal “Istoriya”, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.18254/s207987840021199-7
Misra, D., & Pugh, R. (2023). Developing non-core regions by establishing new universities. Regional Studies, 57(12), 2563–2577.
Prozumentova, G. N. (2016). Obrazovatel’nye innovatsii: fenomen “lichnogo prisutstviya” i potentsial upravleniya (opyt gumanitarnogo issledovaniya) [Educational innovations: the phenomenon of “personal presence” and management potential (experience of humanitarian research)]. Tomsk State University.
Sage Journals Research Group. (2021). University and city: Spaces of risk, decolonization and civic transgression. Environment and Planning A, 47(5), 78–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X211053019
Salomaa, M. (2019). Third mission and regional context: Assessing universities’ entrepreneurial architecture in rural regions. Regional Studies, Regional Science, 6(1), 233–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681376.2019.1586574
Yan, Z. T. (2016). Analysis of the functional positioning of local universities as “urban universities”. Research on the Development of Higher Education, 9(2), 34–45. https://cau.buu.edu.cn/module/download/downfile.jsp?classid=0&filename=9f3ca9795e944200a8c5dfe0782d3d19.pdf
Zheleznyak, O. Y., & Korelina, M. V. (2022). University Campus as a Model of Sustainable City Environment. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, 168, 375–385.
( 414.47 kB ) 
( 397.5 kB )
Issue: 3, 2026
Series of issue: Issue 3
Rubric: ARTICLES
Pages: 9 — 31
Downloads: 111