Ethics Audits and Corporate Governance The Case of Public Sector Sports Organizations

Ethics Audits and Corporate

Governance:The Case of Public Sector Sports Organizations Michael John McNamee

Scott Fleming

ABSTRACT.This article presents a theorized and con-ceptually informed method for the undertaking of an ethics audit organization.At an operational level,the overall integrity of an organization,it is argued,may be evaluated through the application of a conceptual frame-work that embraces the inter-related themes of individual responsibility,social equity and political responsibility. Finally,a method is presented for ethics audit which was developed in the auditing of a national public sector sports organization:sport scotland.This emphasizes the signi?-cance of key personnel(individuals and in groups)in producing and reproducing the organizational ethos, whilst recognizing the importance of anonymity and con?dentiality throughout the process.The theoretical terrain of the ethics audit is articulated through a consid-eration of ethics as applied moral philosophy,equity as social justice and corporate governance as the moral health (or otherwise)of a public sector sports organization.

KEY WORDS:audit,ethics,governance,sport Introduction

On the?elds of play,no less than in the boardrooms of international business,unethical practices appear to be?ourishing.During the last decade there have been confessions about match-?xing in cricket, allegations of fraud in horse racing,and?nancial irregularities over the transfer of players in soccer. There have also been alleged scandals concerning the Olympic bidding process.This is not to suggest that there was ever an age in which wrongdoing was not practised.It is merely worthy of comment now, more than ever before,because of the globalized nature of many Western sports,and because of the extent to which big businesses are involved in their commodi?cation and development.Furthermore, sports have provided a very fertile ground for the exploration of both the social scienti?c investigations of ethically problematic issues(e.g.Tomlinson and Fleming,1997),as well as philosophically grounded expositions of E thics in sports(e.g.McNamee and Parry,1998)1.With increasingly sophisticated methods of investigative journalism(Bent et al., 2001;McIntyre,1999)and other sociological anal-yses(Jennings,2000;Sugden,2002),there has never have been a time when a clear framework for the ethics of corporate governance in sport was needed more.

In this article we present an conceptual frame-work in and through which the Corporate Gover-nance of public sector sports organizations can be evaluated.It is developed from an ethics audit undertaken in2002of sport scotland2–the national organization responsible for providing leadership and direction to the development of sport in Scotland from grass roots participation to elite level perfor-mance.The framework,developed prior to the audit,proved suf?ciently robust and differentiated to allow a successful audit to be undertaken in that context at least.It seems reasonable to assume that it may have broader relevance and applicability to other public sector organizations.Whether that ap-plies to other sports organizations or indeed to for-pro?t organizations is a moot point.The heuristic value of the ethics audit we propose(as a tool of Corporate Governance)is more likely to be limited to medium to large organizations with elements of public funding,operating in the public sector and thus subject to non-market driven norms of?nan-cial,legal and political constraints.In essence,the

Journal of Business Ethics(2007)73:425–437óSpringer2006 DOI10.1007/s10551-006-9216-0

framework provides a method for evaluating the ethical dimensions of organizational culture.In order to do so,there are some key concepts that require clari?cation and(brief)elaboration:(i)ethics,(ii) equity and(iii)corporate governance.The frame-work is then presented according to three levels of operation:(i)the individual,(ii)the social and(iii) the political.Finally,there is a methodological approach through which professionals and academics can operationalize ethics audits of the governance of sports organizations.

Theoretical clarification:ethics,equity and corporate governance

Ethics

It is perhaps easiest to think of ethics as a form of moral philosophy,or at least the systematic study of moral rules,principles,obligations,agreements, values and norms.This makes the scope of ethics necessarily(and,we contend,helpfully)wide.In sports,philosophers and social scientists have often been concerned with ethical discussion of individual behaviours such as the in/defensibility of‘‘diving’’in football or what rights children have in relation to coaches(Brackenridge,2001;Dubois,1986).There has also been consideration of those personal char-acteristics that physical educators and sports coaches have attempted to develop–virtues such as courage, fairness,honesty and respect(McNamee,1995);and those which ought to be challenged and eradicated–vices such as arrogance,dishonesty,racism and sex-ism(Birrell and Cole,1994;Carrington and McDonald,2001;Long and McNamee,2004; McNamee,2002;Tamburrini and Tannsjo,2000). At a societal level there are other issues that shape the culture or moral atmosphere of sports–for in-stance,the un/acceptability of practices such as using performance enhancing supplements(Hoberman, 1992),the use of genetic engineering(Miah,2000), the intimidation of sports of?cials(Thomson,1998) and harassment by coaches(Kirby et al.,2000).A proper target of these researches is to understand and develop critical pictures of the ethoses of sports:the relatively shared values and norms of an activity expressed and negotiated on the playing?eld/court/ pitch(Loland and McNamee,2000).This can be seen as a potential attempt to reconcile the practical outcomes of both virtue and discourse ethics. Finally,there is also the political dimension of ethics too.The institutions of sports that are charged with its governance have responsibilities for the good health of sports in moral and/or?nancial matters(Houlihan,1999),as well as for addressing the situation and circumstances when there is sub-stantive evidence of sports being in a?poor?state of moral and/or?nancial health(Magazine,1999). Here,what is required is a vision of corporate ethics, or corporate governance,that is partly general (which could refer to other similar organizations), and partly speci?c(which depicts the goods/bene?ts of sports).That is to say,detailed and in-depth in-sights about a particular sports organization reveal a great deal about that case study–in this case sport scotland.They also,however,shed some light and point in the direction of more generalizable patterns and trends other organizations that share common characteristics–non-departmental,pub-licly funded bodies working in partnership with public,private and voluntary agencies.

Equity

In addition to these many aspects of the ethics of sports (and corporate governance in particular),the notion of equity has become particularly prominent in recent times.Equity is an important portion of ethics.It trades,essentially,on the idea of social justice and it is helpful to think of justice in sporting activities and games referring to the ideal of fair play.This relates to both the observance of the rules as well as the ethos of the speci?c game encounter.Together,these are designed(in part)to allow an equal opportunity for all concerned to contest the game and win.

Equity itself has many interpretations though it should not simply be confused with the concept or operationalizations of equality.Equity concerns the fair distribution of goods,services or other treat-ment.In sport,as in other areas of life,it is com-monly seen as compensatory.Individuals and groups not previously seen to have received fair shares in the ?lottery of life?are compensated by equity policies that seek to redress the situation according to criteria such as need or desert.

Equity strategies are typically formed around given populations or groupings related to age,class,

426Michael John McNamee and Scott Fleming

disability,ethnicity and gender.Increasingly,such equity policies are seen as socially and ethically desirable responses to unethical actions,practices and policies such as exclusivity,homophobia and racism. Though policies that seek to redress inequity by acting af?rmatively,treating preferentially or dis-criminating favourably(Desjardins,2003)to the advantage of socially disadvantaged individuals or groups are themselves contentious and potentially(in certain circumstances)unlawful.Equity is seen in contemporary times,therefore,as a crucial compo-nent of an ethics strategy by organizations in both public and commercial sectors.

For sport scotland,a commitment to equity is embedded transparently within its own corporate ethical framework,and underpins every aspect of the development,delivery and decision-making in Scottish sport.The recent policy statement(Bennett, 2005)further highlights speci?cally fairness,justice, inclusion and respect–themes to which we will return.

Corporate governance

Corporate Governance and associated concepts such as?ethics audit?are the subject of some ambiguity. The lack of agreed meaning is not merely a linguistic dif?culty.Rather,their heterogeneous meanings and uses are themselves the product of a range of per-ceptions about organizational culture and the proper methods for ensuring standards of conduct within them.?Corporate Governance?and?ethics audit?are, we propose,properly described as?contested con-cepts?.In philosophical language this situation is typically captured in the distinction between a concept and its conceptions.That is to say,a general (often contested idea)and its(often competing)in-stantiations.Here,we shall indicate some of the conceptions of Corporate Governance before spec-ifying that which we have adopted,along with jus-tifying a particular conception of the?ethics audit?which is presented here,and for which a method-ology is then articulated in respect of public sector sports organizations.

Hindley(2003)sets out three such conceptions of ‘‘governance’’:(i)as steering;(ii)as networks and(iii) as good governance.He uses the old distinction between?descriptive?and?normative?concepts to distinguish between the former meanings(i and ii) and the latter(iii).Typically,the dispersal or con-centration of power sets out the former from cen-tralized government while the latter,he says,is ‘‘essentially normative’’.This points to an important historical point about state-controlled versus more open methods of organizational control,but it is not entirely helpful especially when attempting to con-sider an ethics audit as part of Corporate Gover-nance.The distinction itself is a product or legacy of positivism where it is held,inter alia,that there is a logical distinction between facts and values.Even where the legacy of positivism still remains(such as in some areas of sports sciences)that distinction has been challenged from a number of directions both in terms of its underlying epistemology and the con-sequent research methodologies(see McNamee, 2005).

It cannot then simply be a case of setting out the facts–which type of governance(i)or(ii),and then asking how well or badly(iii)these are put into operation.More or less democratic forms of Cor-porate Governance(steering and networks of power) are themselves examples of how(iii)Corporate Governance is brought into being.It is better to think of Corporate Governance as a concept which entails both descriptive and normative features.We will attempt to address both aspects in our meth-odological account below.

Before considering the idea of an ethics audit in relation to sports organizations,it is important to note two important points also made by Hindley (2003)in relation to the application of general concepts and methods of Corporate Governance. He notes:

Despite the burgeoning literature on governance,little research effort has to date been devoted to examining the term in relation to the organization,administration and management of sports organizations.(...)Raising interest in sports governance has also been cultivated by concerns about the management of amateur sports organizations in light of a signi?cant shift from vol-unteer-run?kitchen table operations?to organizations with professional managers attempting to function in a highly rational,bureaucratic manner.

We take our cue from the report by the Cadbury Committee(1992)in the U.K.where Corporate Governance was,perhaps?rst publicly,de?ned

Ethics Audits in Corporate Governance427

somewhat loosely as‘‘The system by which organi-zations are directed and controlled’’(p.15).The de?nition still enjoys wide usage in Local Govern-ment in the U.K.and was also used in the Final Report of the Hampel Committee on Corporate Governance(1998).However,Sternberg(2004) rejects this de?nition(without explicitly arguing why)before offering her own more complex de?-nition of corporate governance as:‘‘Ways of ensuring that corporate actions,agents and assets are directed at achieving the corporate objectives established by the corporation?s shareholders’’(p.28).

There are two critical points to be observed in the superior de?nition that Sternberg(2004)offers. First,we are in total agreement with what is im-plicit in her rejection of the limited de?nition adopted in the Cadbury and Hampel Reports. Sternberg does not note directly,but seems to accept that it allows a latitude that might be easily considered permissive.It attempts to iron out from the de?nition any notion of normative ideals.At best this must be seen as logically incomplete(as we have argued previously)and impossible in practice. Sternberg?s second objection(2004,pp.28–34)is not one that we embody here in this account of the ethics audit but is nonetheless important to note. She argues that many of the objections against Anglo-American Corporate Governance miss the mark because they are aiming at the wrong target. Speci?cally,they either misdescribe or expand hopelessly the term?governance?,or they fail to apply it to?corporations?.By contrast she takes the ?corporate form?of organizations to refer to:‘‘an independent legal existence,and[...]thus capable of enjoying perpetual life’’(p.36).

Our concern is to articulate an ethics audit of public sector sports organizations;and with delib-erate simplicity,we shall take Corporate Governance simply to mean the structuring of an organization so as to achieve its aims or mission in ways that are ethically defensible.It entails recognition that some of those aims or purposes must be arranged so that they display integrity across the full range of the organization?s activities.A central part of corporate governance,then,is the ethical dimension that ranges from hiring practices,and?nancial account-ability,to such matters as the cultivation of a loyal workforce and a respectful and tolerant occupational culture.Ethics audits as a tool of Corporate Governance

In her earlier classic text on business ethics,Stern-berg(1994,p.241)remarked that the ethics audit was a‘‘key management tool’’.Speci?cally,she ar-gued that it is necessary to evaluate the entire organizational culture and key decision-making processes.As with Corporate Governance,however, there is some considerable ambiguity about the nature and methods of ethics audits,and there exists an array of terms that cover similar,though not synonymous,practices.These vary from?social accounting?,?social balance sheets?and?social auditing?(Belal,2002).Overarching these labels are three main strands(Gray,2001,cited in Belal,2002, p.8):‘‘(i)social audits;(ii)silent social accounts;and (iii)new wave social accounting’’.While this is not the place to expound on this conceptual in?ation (for a further critical overview,see Belal,2002)we shall distinguish our conception of the ethics audit ?rst in relation to them.

?New wave social accounting?is the outgrowth of what Belal(2002,p.9)calls‘‘Values-based organi-zations’’.It is unclear whether organizations falling under this somewhat open-ended label appropriately ?t under the corporate form outlined by Sternberg (2004).It would be fairer,we think,to align this type of organization with models of Corporate So-cial Responsibility as opposed to Corporate Gover-nance as outlined above.Second,we reject the idea of?silent social accounts?as a model for the ethics audit within Corporate Governance since it is typi-?ed by unstructured and unsystematic disclosures in corporate annual reports(Belal,2002).Our con-ception of the ethics audit differs too from what he describes as the social audit which,after Gray(2001, p.9),is taken to refer to:‘‘those public analyses of accountable entities undertaken(more or less sys-tematically)by bodies independent of the entity,and typically without the approval of the entity con-cerned’’.

We start our consideration of ethics audits from the position that an organization?s aims and its pro-cedures for achieving them must be open to critique, and may be stimulated by a set of drivers.Zadek (1998,p.1425)helpfully elaborates this as a‘‘ratio-nale triangle’’.He explains that ethics audits may arise from managerialist considerations(ranging from

428Michael John McNamee and Scott Fleming

the simple risk management/public relations exercise to more sophisticated awareness of stakeholders?views),or from public interest(which effectively levers the organization into such an audit),or from a values-shift rationale.Our conceptualization and operationalization of the ethics audit coheres with the notion of a values-sensitive organization which will enable the audit by external researchers or consultants and will allow a scope(in line with the Cadbury Committee)well beyond?nancial accounting and reporting.

It is our contention that ethics audits,when seen under the umbrella of Corporate Governance, though independently carried out,ought to be negotiated with the relevant entity?s knowledge so that any agenda for data collection,evaluation,and potential change can be discussed publicly and in the spirit of partnership rather than hostile accountability as might be driven through by an external accounting of Corporate Social Responsibility.We hold that it is preferable to foster,as Gray notes,an ‘‘open discussion of the organization?s values’’(1996, p.188);though we do not share the idea espoused by DuFrene(2001)and Gray(1996),that an ethics audit should be limited to an evaluation of the implementation of an organization?s code of conduct.

In his excellent exploration of the moral episte-mology of ethics auditing,Mackenzie(1998)at-tempts to locate current work in the broader context of developing ethical knowledge.While his general aim is beyond our present concerns,the Aristotelian moral theoretical commitment he espouses chime very much with the rationale for the ethics audit presented here.An Aristotelian account of corporate governance,and ensuing ethics audit,attempts to articulate the values and virtues of an ideal public sector sports organization as a form of community in and through which good lives are lived in at least the limited sphere or context of the organization?s activities.In other words,the means for living worthwhile lives are partly,in modernity at least, implicated in living ful?lling occupational roles.In turn,they generate much more practical questions:‘‘about how productivity measurement,bonus sys-tems,career paths,training systems,redundancy procedures,unionisation,management style etc. drive employees?sense of ful?lment,loyalty and productivity.And furthermore how ful?lment,loyalty and productivity drive the creation of long term value’’(Reichheld,1996,cited in Mackenzie, 1998,p.1398).This type of ethics audit is therefore substantive and inclusive.It is to be contrasted rather sharply with the idea of ethics,and ethics auditing as merely procedural.

One clear example of the procedural orientation of some ethics audits this is to be found in Garc?′a-Marza′(2005).His conception of ethics auditing is driven,not by substantive ideas of the good,but rather in the processes for arbitrating justly between differently held views of what is morally good or right in pluralistic value settings.The moral theory he draws upon is Discourse Ethics;while the oper-ationalization lies closer to the model of Corporate Social Responsibility–following Dierkes(1979) especially–which is to be found in the social accounting model discussed previously.But dis-course ethics does not aim at particular ends or behaviours which might be worked out in advance by critical re?ection on the good organization,or the‘‘corporate citizen’’(Rosthorn,2000).Instead, after Habermas?s various writings,it seeks to establish a moral contract between interested parties under conditions of equality and respect.Ethically defen-sible practices or policies are simply those that arise from such discourse.This conception of ethics audit is a more democratic one than is typically found in Anglo-American conceptions of Corporate Gover-nance.It is not,though,the one that we pursue here.As Garc?′a-Marza′(2005,p.216)himself ob-serves:‘‘While in Europe,the social balance sheet generally focuses on the company?s internal situa-tion,in the case of the U.S.A.,these reports tend to focus on the external environment’’.

Perhaps,it would be better to consider the grouping‘‘Anglo-American’’(after Sternberg)to better represent two general political systems of democratic capitalism rather than juxtaposing Eur-ope en masse with the U.S.A.Nevertheless,Garc?′a-Marza′(2005)proposes that an appropriate synthesis of both perspectives can be found in stakeholder theory.We have set our account here as one that focuses on the internal aspects of organizational mission and culture and is not preoccupied with issues of external corporate responsibility beyond procedural accountabilities to the public purse Par-adoxically,therefore,despite our theoretical and methodological differences,it is to Garc?′a-Marza′

Ethics Audits in Corporate Governance429

(2005,p.216)that we turn?rst,for a list of ten key themes within his contractualist ethics audit.These are:integrity;credibility;fairness;dialogue;trans-parency;dignity;legality;civic commitment;envi-ronment and responsibility.The degree of overlap in these values is notable.

A framework for the ethics audit of a public sector sports organization

In order to carry out the ethics audit of sport scot-land thoroughly and effectively,a conceptual framework was developed(see Figure1below).It sets out the range of ethical issues in the form of key values and was the template against which sport scotland?s operations were evaluated from a holistic perspective.The values were listed in alphabetical order and were not indicative of any priorities within the levels.Importantly too,the conceptual framework did not attempt to describe actual relations,nor to detail its culture.It merely set down the key parameters.In reality,the three levels or dimensions of the conceptual framework were inter-connected and overlapped each other:none worked in isolation.Yet to fail to articulate con-stituent components could have rendered the audit subjective or formless.

One basic presupposition for ethics audits is that individuals are primarily responsible for their own conduct and character.Nevertheless,in order to guard against naively individualistic interpretations of the ethical health of sport scotland?s staff,orga-nizational purposes or policies,an appreciation was also required of the social and political demands that informed the context of individuals?actions and the policies they sought to implement or operationalize. As McLeod remarks:

The idea that the moral life is largely a matter of carrying out the duties which attach to one?s?station?in society presupposes an unacceptably conformist attitude towards established social arrangements.

(Cited in Solomon,1993,pp.160–161)

The audit attempted,therefore,to appreciate the kinds of norms and values that inform daily practice in terms of the ethos of sport scotland.There was only so much insight could be gleaned from a review of mission statements,formal policies and proce-dures.It was important to bear in mind that a policy or procedure never applies itself.Precisely how individuals carried out their duties,how they inter-preted and prioritized procedures,was a function of the organizational culture of sport scotland and of the individuals?values.

Respect–individual level

As DeSensi and Rosenberg(1996)note,individual or personal values shape the way that individuals experience the organization as employees.In par-ticular,they refer to honesty,integrity and personal commitment,but do so in a way that might have made the audit of sport scotland rather an unstruc-tured and haphazard activity.In a more systematic consideration of the treated as individuals,the?rst level of Figure1sets out the values that are central to

430Michael John McNamee and Scott Fleming

the?respect?with which individuals are treated. These are essentially negative in their orientation, and are in keeping with ethical theories based on the nature of rights and duties(see,for example,Davis, 1994).Persons are thought to have certain rights and duties by virtue of being rationally and morally responsible beings.To respect people is,in the?rst place,to be under a duty not to harm them.This is what is captured in the out-moded English term ?non-malfeasance?.In more modern language this general term is evidenced in particular forms of morally unacceptable behaviour such as non-abuse, non-discrimination,non-exploitation or non-harassment.

While other behaviours could be expressed neg-atively,their more natural expression is in the form of positive values expressed in bene?cent action.An altruistic concern for others is often captured in organizational life in terms of the civility offered to colleagues and the basic honesty of human interac-tion.We are not suggesting,as Boatright(2003,p.5) does,that‘‘Deception is wrong...whether we deceive a friend or a customer’’.Rather,we hold that there is a need to differentiate between those instances that are relatively trivial(for example,the arrangements for a surprise party),from those that are qualitatively different and important.In the main,though,in all but extreme situations,honesty is a cornerstone of effective organizational practice. Similarly,and in close relation to recent U.K. legislation at least,moral rights are thought to pre-serve certain aspects of individuals?lives in relation to that which is properly theirs;this is captured in the values of con?dentiality and privacy.In turn,an organization often receives loyalty from members of its workforce(both individually and collectively)in terms of dutiful obligation and allegiance–particu-larly when there is a sense of shared ownership of the organization?s aims,objectives and mission state-ment.These?labels?are not necessarily exhaustive but are important types of values that underwrite the ethically desirable treatment of individuals within and outside organizations.

Equity–social level

A recognition of shared purposes must,however, re?ect a sense of diversity that cannot be ignored in Western liberal democracies of the21st century, where socio-cultural diversity is a matter of pressing and inescapable reality.Recognizing those differ-ences and celebrating them is a key social goal of many(if not all)public sector organizations,and was for sport scotland.Additionally,people were situated differently within sport scotland with respect to a number of factors(Wexler,2000).These included age,gender,and years of experience,quali?cations, level of operation,responsibility and remuneration. Yet while persons were not identical in terms demographic features,they all had an entitlement to be treated fairly.The second level therefore attaches to considerations of?equity?which we take to mean, broadly,social justice.

Under the banner of equity,the audit sought evidence that the organization did not simply pursue the most ef?cient policies to achieve its aims,but rather did so within a framework that treated indi-viduals with fairness;that is to say,it did not dis-criminate between individuals improperly.Part of fair treatment was recognition of the contributions that individuals made to sport scotland as a whole that was not reducible simply to the individuals and their efforts.This idea is captured in the modern business concept of?synergy?:the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.It is also crucial that the organization was seen as a living community with shared purposes rather than a collection of self-serving individuals.The extent to which there was constructive and purposeful forbearance of diversity (of all kinds)is captured in the notion of tolerance. This key feature of Corporate Governance was twinned with the idea that sport scotland had proper ends or purposes.It would not have been possible to evaluate the organization without a clear sense of those purposes or ends,and a consideration of the processes by which they were to be pursued. Responsibility–political level

The third level of the conceptual framework,relat-ing to?responsibility?,builds upon the idea that an exploration of individuals in social context is incomplete without a proper recognition of the political dimension of their organizational role and their conduct both as individuals and,collectively,as an organization.Amelie Rorty(1988,p.325)has

Ethics Audits in Corporate Governance431

observed that:‘‘Action takes place in a social world. It is,in the end,our social and political relation to others that keeps our virtues in whatever precari-ously appropriate balance they have’’.

Put less prosaically,organizational ethics without politics is like a bicycle without wheels:it will not go anywhere!To fail to address the political dimension of policy and practice would have emasculated the ethics audit of sport scotland from the beginning.To illustrate the point hypothetically,the staff of any public sector sports organization and their client/ partner groups might reasonably expect equity to characterize their treatment of individual staff and their decision-making in the use of public monies (among other things).Similarly,stakeholders in private commercial companies may properly seek for those organizations to display effectiveness and ef?-ciency,and to do so in a manner that is open and accountable.To be ineffective in the use of public or private monies,or to fail to evaluate the success of the means employed to achieve its ends,may be a matter of irresponsibility,just as the deployment of inef?cient means and the selection of inappropriate goals should illicit public opprobrium.Importantly, it is clear that such accountability presupposes transparency of operation on the one hand,and the gaining and holding of trust by both employers and partners alike on the other.These ideas might be further elaborated and re?ned but to do so would move the ethics audit further in the direction of models of Corporate Social Responsibility rather than Corporate Governance.Clearly there is a strong sense of overlap here with public bodies so the issue of scope for ethics is not a de?nitive one. Respect,equity and responsibility:the intersections

As already indicated above,the overlap between areas is considerable.In particular,the concerns of equity and responsibility are in constant tension.At a theoretical level Elster(1992)has remarked: Political?rst-order actors(elected politicians)tend,on the whole,to be motivated by ef?ciency concerns.

Being under relentless pressure from innumerable interest groups as well as administrative agencies,they will be reluctant to allocate funds for a particular scarce good unless they can be con?dent that the funds will

be ef?ciently used.At the highest level,ef?ciency is measured against the use of the same funds in other sectors.In practice,cross-sector comparisons are dif-?cult,since for?nancial purposes there is no common coin for health,education and jobs.(pp.180–181)

He continues:

Equity does,however,matter,but mainly because politicians are constrained by public opinion in which equity concerns are paramount.Politicians fear allo-cative scandals;and more scandals arise from the sight of seeing a good withheld from a needy or deserving person than from seeing it allocated to a person who does not use it ef?ciently.This difference in scandal arousing capacity of inef?ciency and inequity are probably due to the fact that costs and damages are dispersed in the former case,and concentrated in the latter.(p.181)

It is clear,therefore,that a more transparent system of political alliances is crucial to the con?dence that an organization demands,develops and retains with various agencies,as well as the public.Some emphasis was therefore placed on the divergence of the different strands of operation within sport scot-land,which had their own sub-cultural values.The ethics audit also incorporated a recognition of con-text sensitivity;that is to say,there was an acknowledgement of the shifting nature of rela-tionships at the time of their audit.It was,after all, only a?snap-shot?of sport scotland at a particular moment in time–albeit informed by the historical development of the organization itself and the biographies of its personnel.

Applying the conceptual framework and some illustrative data

The purpose of the conceptual framework was twofold.First,to diagrammatically represent ethics and equity issues within a public sector sports organization,sport scotland,in a way that can be understood by members of the organization at all levels,as well as others outside the organization. Second,the framework provided a structure for operationalizing the audit.It did this through an investigation of a set of key themes and issues listed below:

432Michael John McNamee and Scott Fleming

(1)The design and delivery of services provided

(informed by external market and internal

human resource expertize);

(2)An assessment of services delivered;

(3)An evaluation of the effectiveness of the

outputs(products and services);

(4)The resource considerations–human and

?nancial(though the latter,in particular,re-

quired specialist?nancial accounting and

reporting expertize);

(5)The experiences of clients/partners;and

(6)The quality assurance of the services pro-

vided.

The list was used to generate interview schedules about particular points of detail.The items on the list did not,of course,re?ect the actual questions asked. The investigation had two foci.First,an exami-nation of extant documentation that set out sport scotland?s ends and means;its overall strategic priorities and proposed operationalization.Together, it was these(contra Garc?′a-Marza′,2005)that exem-pli?ed a position on ethics and equity.They in-cluded,mutatis mutandis,the organization?s mission statement,strategic plan,operating targets,codes of conduct,portfolio/prospectus of services,personnel handbook,annual reports,client satisfaction data, marketing materials(in different media–print, electronic).This exercise in information gathering and evaluation shaped the direction of the second of the two foci in which a set of interviews was undertaken with different organizational stake-holders(of which,more later).The purpose of the interviews was to interrogate the nature of the experience of ethics and equity amongst individuals and groups both within sport scotland and outside. This was achieved through(a)clari?cation and/or elaboration of documented policy and practice where necessary,and(b)an evaluation of the ef?cacy of the interfaces between organizational?mission?, policy and practice.

We illuminate some of the ethical challenges faced by personnel of sport scotland by drawing on selected data in the form of quotations that speak directly to the political dimension of the conceptual model.These show the value of face-to-face inter-views in eliciting subtle value-orientations that are properly within the scope of the ethics audit,espe-cially at the level of middle and senior management.Consider,for example,the tensions of a public sector organization that also has sports facilities to run(such as elite training centres),which have limited dual usage so that some commercial cus-tomers may be courted in order to offset costs. Delivering ef?cient services with limited income streams,it was felt,was rather like trying to square the circle.One senior manager noted that‘‘What we are coming under pressure from the chairman,from the chief executive,and probably also a re?ection of the treasury,is to operate in a more business/com-mercial sense and that has introduced a tension into the organization.And that repeated use of the word business,which is quite interesting,rubs a number of people up the wrong way.’’Another,in response to the inappropriateness of mixing a public and private sector ethos remarked:‘‘Wow.Dear oh dear.Private business would never go anywhere if we had to wait, and be signed,and do papers,and be approved,and get approval from down there,and?nancing from the Government.’’

A further key factor arising from the audit was also the successful management of national political imperatives(in this case the Scottish Parliament)and the organization?s own aims and purposes.As an-other manager explained:‘‘There?s a much heavier in?uence of delivering now from the money we get, i.e.sports money,issues that have a political nature such as social inclusion partnerships,crime,young people,club development,take young people off the streets-crime rates go down’’.In terms of ef?ciency and accountability to the public purse yet another explained:‘‘I don?t think that there is any other policy initiative that can deliver as many multi-fac-eted outcomes as sport so I?m quite clear that the day of sport-for-sport?s sake in terms for public funding has gone.In fact it?s long gone.’’

These quotations also illustrate the caution that should be exercised when consideration is given to the application of the conceptual model to a wider variety of organizational structures.While it may be possible to apply this framework mutatis mutandis to an ethics audit in a for-pro?t organization,these quotations speak directly to the differences in ethos which the pro?t-motive makes to an organization and its culture and indeed the current shifts in U.K. governmental policy.The speci?city of the economic and geo-political dimensions of any proposed audit must therefore be catered for in the

Ethics Audits in Corporate Governance433

application of both the framework and in any subsequent audits.

As a public sector sports organization, sport scotland had a number of types of?stakehold-ers?and the audit was suf?ciently broad in scope to address the views of each of these.They included senior managers,middle managers,service/product deliverers,administrative and technical personnel, and cleaning,janitorial and security staff;and amongst them the culture,ethos and operation of the organization was in?uenced in a direct relation to institutional hierarchical seniority.That is to say, the audit catered for a representative sample of these stakeholders but not in an arithmetically equal sense. On the basis that those more senior in the organi-zation had a greater opportunity to shape the orga-nizational purposes and culture(DeSensi and Rosenberg,1996),they were interviewed dispro-portionately.For instance,the Janitor and the Chief Executive were not in the same position to in?uence the norms and values of sport scotland–though both contributed to it.Hence the audit interrogated very closely those who set the ethical climate for the organization.The operational model adopted for the audit was therefore to interview senior managers of the organization individually,to conduct separate focus group meetings with middle-managers and service/product deliverers,and to have a wider group discussion with other personnel.The inter-views will be semi-structured(at most),and related to the preliminary collection of paper-based and/or electronically available information.

It was also advantageous to have secured the goodwill of the participants in order to have the opportunity to return to them for further discussion as necessary or desirable.The reason for this was re?ected in the inherent?exibility in some qualita-tive research methods more generally(Hammersley and Atkinson,1983):the scope to explore unantic-ipated items that come to light some way into the audit can be a rich source of genuinely?ground breaking?information gathering.Without that opportunity,some interesting and important issues would have remained under-developed and/or uncorroborated.

It was crucial when planning the audit of sport scotland to have developed mutually support-ive and collaborative relations with the organization. It was especially important at the agenda-setting stage,that the schedule of issues,policies and prac-tices to be investigated were explored thoroughly before the data collection phase began.At this time it was also critical to consider the ethical parameters of the research design and implementation.Protocols for anonymity and con?dentiality,as well as the nature of the data to be seen by the investigators, were agreed.Participants were assured(as far as possible)that anonymity of interviewees would be protected.This was especially important when par-ticipants were commenting about individuals within organizations to whom they were institutionally subordinate(for example,?line-managers?).More-over,when developing focus groups and wider group discussions it was necessary to establish the ?rules of engagement?,which included a commit-ment amongst all present to respect the con?denti-ality of views expressed.The main responsibility of the auditors was to ensure that all identi?ers and descriptors about individual focus group participants were removed from the data that are gathered.In reality this was seldom problematic as the details that were revealed in discussion usually served to illus-trate or illuminate a wider point of principle about the organization as a whole.

A relationship based on mutual trust also enabled the ethics audit to be conducted and reported in such a way as to provoke the most ef?cacious organizational response.Hypothetically,this might have meant,if appropriate,a scathing semi-public critique of the organization(without lapsing into ?scape-goating?).Alternatively,it might have meant a more?tempered?and moderated approach intended to win the battle for?hearts and minds?and achieve purposeful compliance.Only?insider knowledge?(see Dandelion,1997)of the organization itself could have enabled that judgement to be made effectively. Finally,an attempt to attribute responsibility for good and bad elements of the organizational culture and output would have failed to recognize those key persons and posts at which the organization is shaped and driven forward.Throughout the ethics audit of sport scotland it was necessary to attempt to balance individual and cultural elements.Additionally, auditors sought to?nd concrete identi?ers(in a variety of possible shapes and sizes)that provided evidence of the claims made by individuals.To this extent,the evaluation was clearly evidence-based and objective.Consistency amongst multiple data

434Michael John McNamee and Scott Fleming

sources served to strengthen or verify an evaluation about a particular theme(Bryman,1988).Impor-tantly too,when there were?causes for concern?, these were normally evidenced from two or more sources.In other words,auditors did not take at?face value?the subjective assertions of individuals without having sought either policy documentation or cor-roboration from other persons at different levels of the organization.It was not assumed,therefore,that the existence of a policy for,say,gender equity,or equality of opportunity in vacancies for employ-ment,did not imply that it was necessarily being observed in practice.

Set against the conceptual framework for ethics audit and the investigation of sport scotland itself, eight?quality principles?identi?ed by Zadek(1998, pp.1436–1438)were then applied to the analysis.In summary,these are:inclusivity,comparability, completeness,regularity and evolution,embedded-ness,externally veri?ed,communication and con-tinuous improvement.

Evaluative judgements were then reached and shared with the organization.

Conclusion

It is clear that a recognition of ethics and equity will move more closely(and self-consciously)to the heart of sports organizations in the21st century.If an ethics audit of the Corporate Governance of a sports organization is to be effective it ought to proceed on a rational and relatively objective basis. The conceptual framework that drives the model for an audit presented here is an attempt to capture the often-competing levels of operation within sports organizations from individual to social and political levels.Equally,demonstrating integrity as an orga-nization will be evidenced in the attempt to reconcile each of these levels and to display the values set out in the framework in both policy and practice.Ethics and equity related concerns are not, and must not be seen to be,issues that are important only for certain departments or persons within any given sports organization.Neither they ought to be perceived as the product of some particular pressure group.Rather,it is the responsibility of all to be actively engaged in the promotion of good Corporate Governance.In order to develop into a more ethically sound organizational culture,all personnel within sports organizations must make a commitment to improvement in whatever particular forms that takes.In short,there must be leadership at the Executive level and ownership,at all levels,of the ethics agenda if it is to develop.Additionally,the commitment an organization shows to open up to an ethics audit will itself represent some evidence of the nature of Corporate Governance.This should not,however,be seen as a one-off commitment.It will be necessary to initiate a programme that continuously monitors and evaluates the ethics agenda.

Notes

1For a further analysis of the distinction between e thics as social science and E thics as moral philosophy, see McNamee(2000).

2Contextualising material presented about sport scot-land is in the public domain and available from URL: .

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to sport scotland for commissioning the research and for their support whilst carrying it out;and in particular to Jon Best,Rose Challies and Heather Lowden for facilitating the work.

References

Belal,A.:2002,?Stakeholder Accountability or Stake-holder Management:A Review of UK Firms?Social and Ethical Accounting,Auditing and Reporting (SEAR)Practices?,Corporate Social Responsibilty and Environmental Management9,8–25.

Bennett,J.:2005,Equity Strategy–Working towards Diversity and Inclusion in Sport(sportscotland, Edinburgh).

Bent,I.,R.Mcilroy,K.Mousley and P.Walsh:2001, Blowing the Whistle(BBC Worldwide,London).

S.Birrell and C.Cole:1994,Women,Sport and Culture (Human Kinetics,Champaign,IL).

Ethics Audits in Corporate Governance435

Boatright,J.R.:2003,Ethics and the Conduct of Business 4th edition(Pearson Education,New Jersey). Brackenridge, C.:2001,Spoilsports:Understanding and Preventing Sexual Exploitation in Sport(Routledge, London).

Bryman,A.:1988,Quantity and Quality in Social Research (Routledge,London).

Cadbury Committee:1992,Final Report of the Committee for Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance(Gee Publishing,London).

B.Carrington and I.Mcdonald:2001,?Race?,Sport and

British Society(Routledge,London).

Davis,N.A.:1994,?Contemporary Deontology?,in P.Singer(ed.)A Companion to Ethics(Blackwell, Oxford),pp.205–218.

Desjardins,J.:2003,An Introduction to Business Ethics (McGraw-Hill,New York).

Desensi,J.T.and D.Rosenberg:1996,Ethics in Sport Management(Fitness Information Technology, Morgantown,WV).

Dierkes,M.:1979,?Corporate Social Reporting in Germany?,Journal of General Management4,3–13. Dubois,P.E.:1986,?The Effect of Participation in Sport on the Value Orientations of Young Athletes?,Sociol-ogy of Sport Journal3,29–42.

Dufrene,D.D.:2001,?The External Ethics Audit?,A Guided Experience in Self-Directed Web Inquiry.Teaching Business Ethics5,71–7.

Elster,J.:1992,Local Justice:How Institutions Allocate Scarce Goods and Necessary Burdens(Sage,New York). Garc?′a-Marza′,D.:2005,?Trust and Dialogue:Theoretical Approaches to Ethics Auditing?,Journal of Business Ethics57,209–219.

Gray,R.:2001,?Thirty Years of Social Accounting, Reporting and Auditing:What(if Anything)Have We Learned??,Business Ethics:A European Review10,9–15. Gray,S.T.:1996,?Values Evaluation?,Foundation News 36(6),14–16.

Hammersley,M.and P.Atkinson:1983,Ethnography-Principles in Practice(Tavistock Publications,London). Hampel Committee on Corporate Governance:1998, Final Report(Gee Publishing,London).

Hindley, D.:2003,Corporate Governance Resource Guide.Available From URL:. Hoberman,J.:1992,Mortal Engines:The Science of Perfor-mance and the Dehumanisation of Sport(Free Press,New York).

Houlihan,B.:1999,Dying to Win(Council of Europe, Brussels).Jennings,A.:2000,The Great Olympic Swindle(Simon and Schuster,London).

Kirby,S.,L.Greaves and O.Hankivsky:2000,The Dome of Silence:Sexual Harassment and Abuse in Sport(Zed Books,London).

Loland,S.and M.J.McNamee:2000,?Fair Play and the Ethos of Sports:An Eclectic Philosophical Framework?,Journal of the Philosophy of Sport XXVII, 63–80.

Long,J.and M.J.McNamee:2004,?The Moral Econ-omy of Racism and Racist Rationalisations in Sport?, International Review for the Sociology of Sport39(4), 405–420.

Mackenzie, C.:1998,?Ethical Auditing and Ethical Knowledge?,Journal of Business Ethics17,1395–1402. Magazine,P.:1999,Not Quite Cricket(Penguin Books, London).

McIntyre,D.:1999,One Man...Four Lives...Undercover (BBC Worldwide,London).

McNamee,M.J.:1995,?Sporting Practices,Institutions and Virtues:A Critique and a Restatement?,Journal of Philosophy of Sport XXII,61–83.

McNamee,M.J.:2000,?Ethics?,in R.Cox,G.Jarvie and W.Vamplew(eds.)Encyclopedia of British Sport (ABC-CLIO,Oxford),pp.128–130. BibAuthorName>M.J.McNamee:2002,?Hubris, Humility and Humiliation:Vice and Virtue in Sporting Communities?,Journal of the Philosophy of Sport XXVIIII,38–53.

M.J.McNamee and J.Parry:1998,Ethics and Sport (Routledge,London).

McNamee,M.J.:2005,?Positivism,Popper and Para-digms?,in M.J.McNamee(eds.)Philosophy and the Sciences of Exercise,Health and Sport(Routledge, London),pp.1–17.

Miah,A.:2000,?The Engineered Athlete:Human Rights in the Genetic Revolution?,Culture,Sport and Society 3,32–52.

Pink Dandelion,P.:1997,?Insider Dealing:Researching Your Own Private World?,in A.Tomlinson and S.

Fleming(eds.)Ethics,Sport and Leisure:Crises and Critiques(Meyer and Meyer,Aachen),pp.181–201. Rorty,A.:1988,Mind in Action(Beacon Press,Boston). Rosthorn,J.:2000,?Business Ethics–More than a Stake-holder?s Toy?,Journal of Business Ethics27(1–2),9–19. Solomon,R.C.:1993,Ethics and Excellence:Cooperation and Integrity In Business(Oxford University Press, Oxford).

Sternberg,E.:1994,Just Business:Business Ethics in Action (Warner Books,London).

436Michael John McNamee and Scott Fleming

Sternberg,E.:2004,Corporate Governance–Accountability in the Marketplace(Institute for Economic Affairs, London).

Sugden,J.:2002,Scum Airways–Inside Football?s Underground Economy(Mainstream,Edinburgh). Tamburrini,C.and T.Tannsjo:2000,Values and Sport (Routledge,London).

Thomson,G.:1998,The Man in Black–A History of the Football Referee(Prion Books,London).

A.Tomlinson and S.Fleming:1997,Ethics,Sport and

Leisure:Crises and Critiques(Meyer and Meyer,Aachen). Wexler,M.N.:2000,Confronting Moral Worlds–Under-standing Business Ethics(Prentice-Hall,Ontario). Zadek,S.:1998,?Balancing Performance,Ethics and Accountability?,Journal of Business Ethics17, 1421–1441.

Michael John McNamee

Health Science,

Swansea University,

Singleton Park,Swansea, West Glamorgan,SA28PP,U.K. E-mail:m.j.mcnamee@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/ac7290137.html,

Scott Fleming

School of Sport, University of Wales Institute,Cardiff,

Wales,CF26XD,U.K.

E-mail:s?eming@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/ac7290137.html,

Ethics Audits in Corporate Governance437

2016年人体解剖学总结笔记-医学生们的免费总结

人体解剖学 备课笔记

一、 人体解剖学（human an atomy ）:研究正常人体各器官形态、结构、位置、 毗邻关系及其发生发展规律的科学，属于 生物学中形态学的范畴。 目的：使学生理解和掌握人体各器官系统的形态结构特点及其相互关系， 为学习其他基础医学和临床医学课程奠定必要的形态学基础。 二、 分类： 来阐明每一个局部有关 广义解剖学 及毗邻关系。 细胞学 组织学 胚胎学 其他门类：断层解剖学、比较解剖学、运动解剖学、应用解剖学、生长解剖 学、艺术解剖学等。 三、 人体结构概述： （一） 细胞+间质 一"组嚅官 系统 人体 （二） 人体九大系统： 1、运动系统： 2、消化系统； 3、呼吸系统； 4、泌尿系统； 5、生殖系 统； 6、脉管系统； 7、内分泌系统；8感觉器；9、神经系统。 （三） 分部： 1、 头部：颅、面。 2、 颈部：颈、项。 3、 躯干部：胸部、腹部、盆部。 4、 四肢 左、右上肢：肩、臂、前臂、手； L 左、右下肢：臀、大腿、小腿、足。 四、 人体解剖学的基本术语 （一） 解剖学姿势：人体直立，面向前方，两眼平视正前方，两上肢下垂于 躯干两侧，手掌向前，两足并立，足尖向前。 （二） 方位术语： 4、 内与外：某结构与体腔或空腔脏器的相互位置关系，近腔者为内， 远腔者为外。 5、 浅、深：体内某点与体表间的距离，近皮肤者为浅，远者为深 J 近侧：靠近肢体附着者 系统解剖学: 将人体分成若干个系统， 按各个系 统进行形态结构等的 （ 巨视解剖学 局部解剖学 叙述。 :将人体分成若干个部分， 按部分 诸器官结构的层次排列、 局部位置 微视解剖学 1、 上（颅侧）：近头者 2、 前（腹侧）：近腹者 3、 内侧：近正中面者 下（尾侧）：近足者 后（背侧）：近背者 外侧： 远正中面者。

半导体物理知识点及重点习题总结

基本概念题： 第一章半导体电子状态 1.1 半导体 通常是指导电能力介于导体和绝缘体之间的材料，其导带在绝对零度时全空，价带全满，禁带宽度较绝缘体的小许多。 1.2能带 晶体中，电子的能量是不连续的，在某些能量区间能级分布是准连续的，在某些区间没有能及分布。这些区间在能级图中表现为带状，称之为能带。 1.2能带论是半导体物理的理论基础，试简要说明能带论所采用的理论方法。 答： 能带论在以下两个重要近似基础上，给出晶体的势场分布，进而给出电子的薛定鄂方程。通过该方程和周期性边界条件最终给出E-k关系，从而系统地建立起该理论。 单电子近似： 将晶体中其它电子对某一电子的库仑作用按几率分布平均地加以考虑，这样就可把求解晶体中电子波函数的复杂的多体问题简化为单体问题。 绝热近似： 近似认为晶格系统与电子系统之间没有能量交换，而将实际存在的这种交换当作微扰来处理。 1.2克龙尼克—潘纳模型解释能带现象的理论方法 答案： 克龙尼克—潘纳模型是为分析晶体中电子运动状态和E-k关系而提出的一维晶体的势场分布模型，如下图所示 利用该势场模型就可给出一维晶体中电子所遵守的薛定谔方程的具体表达式，进而确定波函数并给出E-k关系。由此得到的能量分布在k空间上是周期函数，而且某些能量区间能级是准连续的（被称为允带），另一些区间没有电子能级（被称为禁带）。从而利用量子力学的方法解释了能带现象，因此该模型具有重要的物理意义。 1.2导带与价带 1.3有效质量 有效质量是在描述晶体中载流子运动时引进的物理量。它概括了周期性势场对载流子运动的影响，从而使外场力与加速度的关系具有牛顿定律的形式。其大小由晶体自身的E-k 关系决定。 1.4本征半导体 既无杂质有无缺陷的理想半导体材料。 1.4空穴 空穴是为处理价带电子导电问题而引进的概念。设想价带中的每个空电子状态带有一个正的基本电荷，并赋予其与电子符号相反、大小相等的有效质量，这样就引进了一个假想的

人体解剖学笔记

人体解剖学

绪论 一、人体解剖学(human anatomy)：研究正常人体各器官形态、结构、位置、毗邻关系及其发生发展规律的科学，属于 生物学中形态学的范畴。 目的：使学生理解和掌握人体各器官系统的形态结构特点及其相互关系，为学习其他基础医学和临床医学课程奠定必要的形态学基础。 二、分类： 系统解剖学：将人体分成若干个系统，按各个系统进行形态结构等的 巨视解剖学叙述。 局部解剖学：将人体分成若干个部分，按部分来阐明每一个局部有关 广义解剖学诸器官结构的层次排列、局部位置及毗邻关系。 细胞学 微视解剖学组织学 胚胎学 其他门类：断层解剖学、比较解剖学、运动解剖学、应用解剖学、生长解剖学、艺术解剖学等。 三、人体结构概述： （一）细胞＋间质组织器官系统人体 （二）人体九大系统： 1、运动系统： 2、消化系统； 3、呼吸系统； 4、泌尿系统； 5、生殖系统； 6、脉管系统； 7、内分泌系统； 8、感觉器； 9、神经系统。 （三）分部： 1、头部：颅、面。 2、颈部：颈、项。 3、躯干部：胸部、腹部、盆部。 4、四肢左、右上肢：肩、臂、前臂、手； 左、右下肢：臀、大腿、小腿、足。 四、人体解剖学的基本术语 （一）解剖学姿势：人体直立，面向前方，两眼平视正前方，两上肢下垂于躯干两侧，手掌向前，两足并立，足尖向前。 （二）方位术语： 1、上（颅侧）：近头者下（尾侧）：近足者 2、前（腹侧）：近腹者后（背侧）：近背者 3、内侧：近正中面者外侧：远正中面者。 4、内与外：某结构与体腔或空腔脏器的相互位置关系，近腔者为内，远腔者为外。 5、浅、深：体内某点与体表间的距离，近皮肤者为浅，远者为深 近侧：靠近肢体附着者 6、四肢远侧：远离肢体附着者 内侧和外侧上肢：尺、桡 下肢：胫、腓 （三）轴和面 1、轴： 1）垂直轴：上、下方向走行； 2）矢状轴：前、后方向走行； 3）冠（额）状轴：左、右方向走行。 2、面： 1）矢状面（纵切面）：将人体分成左、右两半 （居于正中，将身体分为左右相等两半称正中矢状面）； 2）冠状面（额状面）：将人体分成前、后两半；

最新尼尔曼第三版半导体物理与器件小结+重要术语解释+知识点+复习题

尼尔曼第三版半导体物理与器件小结+重要术语解释+知识点+复 习题

第一章固体晶体结构 (3) 小结 (3) 重要术语解释 (3) 知识点 (3) 复习题 (3) 第二章量子力学初步 (4) 小结 (4) 重要术语解释 (4) 第三章固体量子理论初步 (4) 小结 (4) 重要术语解释 (4) 知识点 (5) 复习题 (5) 第四章平衡半导体 (6) 小结 (6) 重要术语解释 (6) 知识点 (6) 复习题 (7) 第五章载流子运输现象 (7) 小结 (7) 重要术语解释 (8) 知识点 (8) 复习题 (8) 第六章半导体中的非平衡过剩载流子 (8) 小结 (8) 重要术语解释 (9) 知识点 (9) 复习题 (10) 第七章pn结 (10) 小结 (10) 重要术语解释 (10) 知识点 (11) 复习题 (11) 第八章pn结二极管 (11) 小结 (11) 重要术语解释 (12) 知识点 (12) 复习题 (13) 第九章金属半导体和半导体异质结 (13) 小结 (13) 重要术语解释 (13) 知识点 (14) 复习题 (14) 第十章双极晶体管 (14)

小结 (14) 重要术语解释 (15) 知识点 (16) 复习题 (16) 第十一章金属-氧化物-半导体场效应晶体管基础 (16) 小结 (16) 重要术语解释 (17) 知识点 (18) 复习题 (18) 第十二章金属-氧化物-半导体场效应管：概念的深入 (18) 小结 (19) 重要术语解释 (19) 知识点 (19) 复习题 (20)

第一章固体晶体结构 小结 1.硅是最普遍的半导体材料。 2.半导体和其他材料的属性很大程度上由其单晶的晶格结构决定。晶胞是晶体 中的一小块体积，用它可以重构出整个晶体。三种基本的晶胞是简立方、体心立方和面心立方。 3.硅具有金刚石晶体结构。原子都被由4个紧邻原子构成的四面体包在中间。 二元半导体具有闪锌矿结构，它与金刚石晶格基本相同。 4.引用米勒系数来描述晶面。这些晶面可以用于描述半导体材料的表面。密勒 系数也可以用来描述晶向。 5.半导体材料中存在缺陷，如空位、替位杂质和填隙杂质。少量可控的替位杂 质有益于改变半导体的特性。 6.给出了一些半导体生长技术的简单描述。体生长生成了基础半导体材料，即 衬底。外延生长可以用来控制半导体的表面特性。大多数半导体器件是在外延层上制作的。 重要术语解释 1.二元半导体：两元素化合物半导体，如GaAs。 2.共价键：共享价电子的原子间键合。 3.金刚石晶格：硅的院子晶体结构，亦即每个原子有四个紧邻原子，形成一个 四面体组态。 4.掺杂：为了有效地改变电学特性，往半导体中加入特定类型的原子的工艺。 5.元素半导体：单一元素构成的半导体，比如硅、锗。

人体解剖学考试重点笔记+

人体解剖学备课笔记

绪论 一、人体解剖学(human anatomy)：研究正常人体各器官形态、结构、位置、毗邻 关系及其发生发展规律的科学，属于生物学中形 态学的范畴。 目的：使学生理解和掌握人体各器官系统的形态结构特点及其相互关系，为学习其他基础医学和临床医学课程奠定必要的形态学基础。 二、分类： 系统解剖学：将人体分成若干个系统，按各个系统进行形态结构等的 巨视解剖学叙述。 局部解剖学：将人体分成若干个部分，按部分来阐明每一个局部有关 广义解剖学诸器官结构的层次排列、局部位置及毗邻关系。 细胞学 微视解剖学组织学 胚胎学 其他门类：断层解剖学、比较解剖学、运动解剖学、应用解剖学、生长解剖学、艺术解剖学等。 三、人体结构概述： （一）细胞＋间质组织器官系统人体 （二）人体九大系统： 1、运动系统： 2、消化系统； 3、呼吸系统； 4、泌尿系统； 5、生殖系统； 6、脉管系统； 7、内分泌系统； 8、感觉器； 9、神经系统。

（三）分部： 1、头部：颅、面。 2、颈部：颈、项。 3、躯干部：胸部、腹部、盆部。 4、四肢左、右上肢：肩、臂、前臂、手； 左、右下肢：臀、大腿、小腿、足。 四、人体解剖学的基本术语 （一）解剖学姿势：人体直立，面向前方，两眼平视正前方，两上肢下垂于躯干两 侧，手掌向前，两足并立，足尖向前。 （二）方位术语： 1、上（颅侧）：近头者下（尾侧）：近足者 2、前（腹侧）：近腹者后（背侧）：近背者 3、内侧：近正中面者外侧：远正中面者。 4、内与外：某结构与体腔或空腔脏器的相互位置关系，近腔者为内，远腔者为外。 5、浅、深：体内某点与体表间的距离，近皮肤者为浅，远者为深 近侧：靠近肢体附着者 6远侧：远离肢体附着者 内侧和外侧上肢：尺、桡 下肢：胫、腓 （三）轴和面 1、轴： 1）垂直轴：上、下方向走行； 2）矢状轴：前、后方向走行；

半导体物理知识点总结

半导体物理知识点总结 本章主要讨论半导体中电子的运动状态。主要介绍了半导体的几种常见晶体结构，半导体中能带的形成，半导体中电子的状态和能带特点，在讲解半导体中电子的运动时，引入了有效质量的概念。阐述本征半导体的导电机构，引入了空穴散射的概念。最后，介绍了Si、Ge和GaAs的能带结构。 在1.1节，半导体的几种常见晶体结构及结合性质。（重点掌握）在1.2节，为了深入理解能带的形成，介绍了电子的共有化运动。介绍半导体中电子的状态和能带特点，并对导体、半导体和绝缘体的能带进行比较，在此基础上引入本征激发的概念。（重点掌握）在1.3节，引入有效质量的概念。讨论半导体中电子的平均速度和加速度。（重点掌握）在1.4节，阐述本征半导体的导电机构，由此引入了空穴散射的概念，得到空穴的特点。（重点掌握）在1.5节，介绍回旋共振测试有效质量的原理和方法。（理解即可）在1.6节，介绍Si、Ge的能带结构。（掌握能带结构特征）在1.7节，介绍Ⅲ-Ⅴ族化合物的能带结构，主要了解GaAs的能带结构。（掌握能带结构特征）本章重难点： 重点： 1、半导体硅、锗的晶体结构（金刚石型结构）及其特点； 三五族化合物半导体的闪锌矿型结构及其特点。 2、熟悉晶体中电子、孤立原子的电子、自由电子的运动有何不同：孤立原子中的电子是在该原子的核和其它电子的势场中运动，自由电子是在恒定为零的势场中运动，而晶体中的电子是在严格周期性重复排列的原子间运动（共有化运动），单电子近似认为，晶体中的某一个电子是在周期性排列且固定不动的原子核的势场以及其它大量电子的平均势场中运动，这个势场也是周期性变化的，而且它的周期与晶格周期相同。 3、晶体中电子的共有化运动导致分立的能级发生劈裂，是形成半导体能带的原因，半导体能带的特点： ①存在轨道杂化，失去能级与能带的对应关系。杂化后能带重新分开为上能带和下能带，上能带称为导带，下能带称为价带②低温下，价带填满电子，导带全空，高温下价带中的一部分电子跃迁到导带，使晶体呈现弱导电性。

人体解剖学笔记.doc

人 体 解 剖 学 绪论 一、人体解剖学(human anatomy)：研究正常人体各器官形态、结构、位置、毗邻关系及其发生发展规律的科学，属于 生物学中形态学的范畴。 目的：使学生理解和掌握人体各器官系统的形态结构特点及其相互关系，为学习其他基础医学和临床医学课程奠定必要的形态学基础。 二、分类： 系统解剖学：将人体分成若干个系统，按各个系统进行形态结构等的 巨视解剖学叙述。 局部解剖学：将人体分成若干个部分，按部分来阐明每一个局部有关 广义解剖学诸器官结构的层次排列、局部位置及毗邻关系。 细胞学 微视解剖学组织学 胚胎学 其他门类：断层解剖学、比较解剖学、运动解剖学、应用解剖学、生长解剖学、艺术解剖学等。 三、人体结构概述： （一）细胞＋间质组织器官系统人体 （二）人体九大系统： 1、运动系统： 2、消化系统； 3、呼吸系统； 4、泌尿系统； 5、生殖系统； 6、脉管系统； 7、内分泌系统； 8、感觉器； 9、神经系统。 （三）分部： 1、头部：颅、面。 2、颈部：颈、项。 3、躯干部：胸部、腹部、盆部。 4、四肢左、右上肢：肩、臂、前臂、手； 左、右下肢：臀、大腿、小腿、足。 四、人体解剖学的基本术语 （一）解剖学姿势：人体直立，面向前方，两眼平视正前方，两上肢下垂于躯干两侧，手掌向前，两足并立，足尖向

前。 （二）方位术语： 1、上（颅侧）：近头者下（尾侧）：近足者 2、前（腹侧）：近腹者后（背侧）：近背者 3、内侧：近正中面者外侧：远正中面者。 4、内与外：某结构与体腔或空腔脏器的相互位置关系，近腔者为内，远腔者为外。 5、浅、深：体内某点与体表间的距离，近皮肤者为浅，远者为深 近侧：靠近肢体附着者 6、四肢远侧：远离肢体附着者 内侧和外侧上肢：尺、桡 下肢：胫、腓 （三）轴和面 1、轴： 1）垂直轴：上、下方向走行； 2）矢状轴：前、后方向走行； 3）冠（额）状轴：左、右方向走行。 2、面： 1）矢状面（纵切面）：将人体分成左、右两半 （居于正中，将身体分为左右相等两半称正中矢状面）； 2）冠状面（额状面）：将人体分成前、后两半； 3）水平面（横切面）：将人体分成上、下两半。 器官：纵切面－与长轴平行横切面－与长轴垂直 五、学习人体解剖学必须具备的观点： （一）形态与功能相结合的观点 （二）局部与整体统一的观点 （三）进化发展的观点 （四）理论密切联系实际的观点 第一篇运动系统 组成：骨、关节、骨骼肌 第一章骨学 第一节总论 骨（bone）:是一种器官，由骨组织（骨细胞、胶原纤维、基质）构成，具有一定的形态和构造，外被骨膜、内含骨髓，具有丰富的血管、神经和淋巴管。能不断地进行新陈代谢和生长发育，并具有改建、修复和再生能力。骨骼：骨借骨连接连在一起称骨骼。 一、分类：全身共有206块骨 颅骨：脑颅骨、面颅骨中轴骨 1、根据部位分躯干骨：椎骨、胸骨、肋 四肢骨：上肢骨、下肢骨 2、根据形态分类： 1）长骨（long bone）一体(骨干)：内有骨髓腔，容纳骨髓 两端(骺)：两端膨大，称为骺，其光滑面称关节面 干骺端：骨干与骺相邻的部分 骺软骨（epiphysial cartilage)：幼年时骺与骨干之间借透明软骨相连，该软骨称～，骺软骨细胞不断分裂、繁殖和骨化，使骨不断加长。成年后，骺软骨骨化，骨干与骺融为一体，融合骺遗留下来的痕迹称骺线。 2）短骨(short bone)：立方形，成群分布于连结牢固且稍灵活的部位，如腕骨、跗骨。 3）扁骨(flat bone)：扁宽的板状，常围成腔，如颅骨，肋骨。 4）不规则骨(irregular bone)：形状不规则，如椎骨和髋骨。

解剖学知识总结

解剖学知识总结 绪论 人体解剖学是研究人体正常形态结构的科学，其任务在于理解和掌握人体各器官的形态结构、位置和毗邻关系，为学习其他基础医学和临床医学奠定基础。 人体解剖学的教学分系统解剖学和局部解剖学两部分进行。系统解剖学是按照人体各器官、系统来研究人体的形态结构；局部解剖学则是按照身体局部来研究各器宫的形态结构和相互间的位置关系。 要运用进化发展的观点，形态与功能相结合的观点，局部与整体统一的观点和理论密切联系实际的观点来观察和研究人体的形态与构造。学习时要重视标本、模型的观察和活体触摸要学会用工具书，如图谱。 掌握人体的轴、面和方位术语： 解剖学姿势——身体直立，两眼向正前方平视，两足并立，足尖向前，上肢下垂于躯干两侧，手掌向前。对人体结构描述，均以此姿势为标准。 人体的轴——根据标准姿势，人体可有互相垂直的三种类型的轴。即： (1)矢状轴：由前→后，与身体长轴和冠状轴相垂直的轴。 (2)冠状轴：由左→右，与身体长轴和矢状轴相垂直的轴，又称额状轴。 (3)垂直轴：由上→下，与身体长轴平行的轴。 人体的切面——亦分三种： (1)矢状面：以前后方向将身体分成左右两部的纵切面。若将身体分成相等的左右两半，称为正中矢状面。 (2)冠状面：以左右方向将身体分成前后两部的纵切面。 (3)水平面：与垂直轴相垂直，将身体分为上、下两部的断面。 常用方位术语： 腹侧——近腹面背侧——近背面 上(颅侧)——近头下(尾侧)——近足 内侧——近正中面外侧——距正中面较远 内——近内腔外——距内腔较远 浅——近体表深——距体表较远 近侧——近肢根远侧——距肢根较远 第一篇运动系统 掌握运动系统的组成及功能： 运动系统由骨、骨连结和骨骼肌组成。 运动系统构成了人体的支架和基本形态，起保护、支持和运动的作用。

半导体物理知识点梳理

半导体物理考点归纳 一· 1.金刚石 1) 结构特点： a. 由同类原子组成的复式晶格。其复式晶格是由两个面心立方的子晶格彼此沿其空间对角线位移1/4的长度形成 b. 属面心晶系，具立方对称性，共价键结合四面体。 c. 配位数为4，较低，较稳定。(配位数：最近邻原子数) d. 一个晶体学晶胞内有4+8*1/8+6*1/2=8个原子。 2) 代表性半导体：IV 族的C ，Si ，Ge 等元素半导体大多属于这种结构。 2.闪锌矿 1) 结构特点： a. 共价性占优势，立方对称性； b. 晶胞结构类似于金刚石结构，但为双原子复式晶格； c. 属共价键晶体，但有不同的离子性。 2) 代表性半导体：GaAs 等三五族元素化合物均属于此种结构。 3.电子共有化运动： 原子结合为晶体时，轨道交叠。外层轨道交叠程度较大，电子可从一个原子运动到另一原子中，因而电子可在整个晶体中运动，称为电子的共有化运动。 4.布洛赫波： 晶体中电子运动的基本方程为： ，K 为波矢，uk(x)为一个与晶格同周期的周期性函数， 5.布里渊区： 禁带出现在k=n/2a 处，即在布里渊区边界上； 允带出现在以下几个区： 第一布里渊区:－1/2a

正常人体解剖学学习心得体会分享

正常人体解剖学学习心 得体会分享 Document number：WTWYT-WYWY-BTGTT-YTTYU-2018GT

《正常人体解剖学》学习心得体会分享 15级针灸推拿二班曹睿 还有几个月，我们大一的学生来到黑龙江中医药大学就要满一年了。经过将近一年的学习，我们都有所收获，在此我想就我对《正常人体解剖学》这门课和同学们分享一下我的学习心得体会。 在刚刚学习的时候，很多同学有着这样的想法，就是我们作为中医药大学的学生为什么要学习解剖学这样的课程呢加之本门课程的复杂性，许多同学学习的并不是很好。 首先，我们应该从心理上克服这个问题。要知道，我们的确是中医院校，但是这与我们学习最基本的医学知识有什么冲突呢古人无法看到的东西我们现在可以系统地学习到，应该当作一种幸事来看才对。另外，作为针灸推拿学专业和康复医学专业的同学，对解剖知识还需要有更深层次的了解，为将来学习针刺治疗打好解剖学基础。 其次，解剖学虽然有知识点多，复杂的特点，但是解剖学也如其他学科一样，要想较好地掌握其知识点，也需要根据各人自身的学习特点选择适当的学习方法，端正的学习态度加上有效的学习方法是成功的关键。 《正常人体解剖学》在西医院校的叫法是《系统解剖学》，系统解剖的意思就是把人分为九大功能系统来学习就是运动系统、消化系统、生殖系统、心血管系统、神经系统共九个系统这样就学习了人的基本结构。下面仅就正常人体解剖学的一些特点分享一下我觉得学好正解的方法及注意点： 一、理论与实际相结合

解剖学研究的是正常人体的形态、结构，名词多，记忆量大是其特点。但这并不意味着学好它就必须靠死记硬背，而是重视实验，珍惜每次实验机会，将学到的理论知识与解剖标本、模型的观察结合起来。同时注重活体的触摸和观察，充分利用其直观的印象促进自身对知识的理解、记忆。加强对图片的认识，在固定一段时间进行复习。 二、形态与功能相结合 人体各器官都有其特定的功能和结构。两者是相互依存，相互影响的。一定的形态、构造表现一定的功能，但功能的变化也能作用于结构、形态并引起其相应的变化。如：上下肢分工不同，其形态、结构也因此表现出各自的特点。在解剖学的学习中，理解双方这种关系，对于掌握人体器官结构的形态特征是非常重要的。 三、局部与整体相统一 人体是一个有机整体，由众多系统和器官组成。器官与整体，器官与器官之间在形态、功能上是相互联系，相互影响的。而系统解剖学将一系列形态，功能相似的器官归为一个系统，就系统内部各器官而言，首先掌握其形态，功能上的相似性，把握其共同特征，然后根据各器官自身形态、功能上的特点，加以区分。理解它们的异同点，这样更有利于记忆，做到层次分明，条理清晰。 四、重点与难点的把握 因为学时的关系，将一部教材的所有知识全都掌握是不可能的。要想很好地掌握重点与难点，要抓住以下几个环节： 1. 上课认真听讲，做好笔记，从老师的讲解中，抓住重点与难点。

半导体物理笔记总结 对考研考刘恩科的半导体物理很有用 对考研考刘恩科的半导体物理很有用

半导体物理 绪 论 一、什么是半导体 导体 半导体 绝缘体 电导率ρ <10- 9 3 10~10- 9 10> cm ?Ω 此外，半导体还有以下重要特性 1、 温度可以显著改变半导体导电能力 例如：纯硅（Si ） 若温度从 30C 变为C 20时，ρ增大一倍 2、 微量杂质含量可以显著改变半导体导电能力 例如：若有100万硅掺入1个杂质（P . Be ）此时纯度99.9999% ，室温（C 27 300K ）时，电阻率由214000Ω降至0.2Ω 3、 光照可以明显改变半导体的导电能力 例如：淀积在绝缘体基片上（衬底）上的硫化镉（CdS ）薄膜，无光照时电阻（暗电阻）约为几十欧姆，光照时电阻约为几十千欧姆。 另外，磁场、电场等外界因素也可显著改变半导体的导电能力。 综上： ● 半导体是一类性质可受光、热、磁、电，微量杂质等作用而改变其性质的材料。 二、课程内容 本课程主要解决外界光、热、磁、电，微量杂质等因素如何影响半导体性质的微观机制。 预备知识——化学键的性质及其相应的具体结构 晶体：常用半导体材料Si Ge GaAs 等都是晶体 固体 非晶体：非晶硅（太阳能电池主要材料） 晶体的基本性质：固定外形、固定熔点、更重要的是组成晶体的原子（离子）在较大范围里（6 10-m ）按一定方式规则排列——称为长程有序。 单晶：主要分子、原子、离子延一种规则摆列贯穿始终。 多晶：由子晶粒杂乱无章的排列而成。 非晶体：没有固定外形、固定熔点、内部结构不存在长程有序，仅在较小范围（几个原子距）存在结构有 序——短程有序。 §1 化学键和晶体结构 1、 原子的负电性 化学键的形成取决于原子对其核外电子的束缚力强弱。 电离能：失去一个价电子所需的能量。 亲和能：最外层得到一个价电子成为负离子释放的能量。(ⅡA 族和氧除外) 原子负电性=（亲和能+电离能）18.0? （Li 定义为1） ● 负电性反映了两个原子之间键合时最外层得失电子的难易程度。 ● 价电子向负电性大的原子转移 ⅠA 到ⅦA ，负电性增大，非金属性增强

正常人体解剖学期考重点总结

1.何谓人体解剖学姿势？ 答：人体解剖学姿势即身体直立，两眼向前平视，下肢靠拢，足尖朝前，双上肢自然下垂于躯体干两侧，手掌朝前。 2.骨按形态可分为：长骨、短骨、扁骨、不规则骨。 胸骨自上而下依次分为：胸骨柄、胸骨体、剑突。 顶骨、颞骨，不成对的脑颅骨有：额骨、枕骨、蝶骨、筛骨。 鼻旁窦有四对，包括：额窦、筛窦、蝶窦、上颌窦。 肩胛骨上能触及的骨性标志有：肩峰、上角、下角、肩胛冈、喙突、内侧缘。 7.椎间盘由纤维环和髓核构成。 8.胸廓是由12块胸椎、12对肋和1块胸骨借骨连结构成的。 9.下颌关节由：下颌头与下颌窝构成。其关节腔内有：关节盘。 10.椎间孔：是指相邻椎骨的椎上切迹和椎下切迹所组成的孔，有脊神经和血管通过。 11.胸骨角：胸骨柄与胸骨体相接处形成突向前方的横行隆起，称为胸骨角，可在体表摸到，他平对第二肋，为计数肋的重要标志。 12.翼点：在颞窝区内有额、顶、颞、蝶四骨的汇合处，称为翼点，此处骨质比较薄弱，其内面有脑膜中动脉前支经过，翼点处骨折时，容易损伤该动脉，引起颅内血肿。 13.椎间盘：椎间盘是上、下相邻两个椎体之间的纤维软骨盘，由周围的纤维环和中央部的髓核构成。 14.腹股沟管：腹股沟管是指腹股沟韧带内侧半上方有一斜贯腹肌和腱膜的裂隙，为男性的精索或女性子宫圆韧带所通过。 15.试述椎骨的一般形态。 答：每块椎骨均由椎体和椎弓两部分构成。椎体位于前部，呈短圆柱状。椎弓试附在椎体后方的弓状骨板，它与椎体围成椎孔椎弓与椎体相连的部分较细，称为椎弓根，其上方有椎上切迹，下方有椎下切迹，相连椎骨的椎上下切迹组成椎间孔。两侧椎弓根向后内侧扩展为宽阔的骨板，称为椎弓板。每个椎弓伸出7个突起，即向两侧伸出一对横突，向上伸出一对上关节突，向下伸出一对下关节突，向后伸出单一的棘突。 16.写出鼻旁窦的名称及开口部位。

半导体物理学第八章知识点

第8章 半导体表面与MIS 结构 许多半导体器件的特性都和半导体的表面性质有着密切关系，例如，晶体管和集成电路的工作参数及其稳定性在很大程度上受半导体表面状态的影响；而MOS 器件、电荷耦合器件和表面发光器件等，本就是利用半导体表面效应制成的。因此．研究半导体表面现象，发展相关理论，对于改善器件性能，提高器件稳定性，以及开发新型器件等都有着十分重要的意义。 §8.1 半导体表面与表面态 在第2章中曾指出，由于晶格不完整而使势场的周期性受到破坏时，禁带中将产生附加能级。达姆在1932年首先提出：晶体自由表面的存在使其周期场中断，也会在禁带中引入附加能级。实际晶体的表面原子排列往往与体内不同，而且还存在微氧化膜或附着有其他分子和原子，这使表面情况变得更加复杂。因此这里先就理想情形，即晶体表面无缺陷和附着物的情形进行讨论。 一、理想一维晶体表面模型及其解 达姆采用图8-l 所示的半无限克龙尼克—潘纳模型描述具有单一表面的一维晶体。图中x ＝0处为晶体表面；x ≥0的区域为晶体内部，其势场以a 为周期随x 变化；x ≤0的区域表示晶体之外，其中的势能V 0为一常数。在此半无限周期场中，电子波函数满足的薛定谔方程为 )0(20202≤=+-x E V dx d m φφφη (8-1) )0()(2202≥=+-x E x V dx d m φφφη (8-2) 式中V (x)为周期场势能函数，满足V (x +a )=V(x )。 对能量E ＜V 0的电子，求解方程(8-1)得出这些 电子在x ≤0区域的波函数为 ])(2ex p[)(001x E V m A x η -=φ (8-3) 求解方程(8-2)，得出这些电子在x ≥0区域中波函数的一般解为 kx i k kx i k e x u A e x u A x ππφ22212)()()(--+= (8-4) 当k 取实数时，式中A 1和A 2可以同时不为零，即方程(8-2)满足边界条件φ1(0)=φ2(0)和φ1'(0)=φ2'(0)的解也就是一维无限周期势场的解，这些解所描述的就是电子在导带和价带中的允许状态。 但是，当k 取复数k =k '+ik ''时（k '和k ''皆为实数），式(8-4)变成 x k x k i k x k x k i k e e x u A e e x u A x '''--''-'+=ππππφ2222212)()()( (8-5) 此解在x→∞或-∞时总有一项趋于无穷大，不符合波函数有限的原则，说明无限周期势场不能有复数解。但是，当A 1和A 2任有一个为零，即考虑半无限时，k 即可取复数。例如令A 2＝0，则 x k x k i k e e x u A x ''-'=ππφ2212)()( (8-6) 图8-l 一维半无限晶体的势能函数

人体解剖学学习心得

人体解剖学学习心得 人体解剖学是关于人体形态结构的学科，是一门重要的护理学基础课程，解剖学知识不仅是学习生理学，内外科护理学等课程的基础，同时坚实的解剖学知识是做好临床护理工作的可靠基础；作为一个非医学专业的大学生，虽然不用过深的对人体解剖方面进行深入的研究，但是平时多掌握一些医学常识，了解一些基本的人体构造方面的知识还是很有必要的。 基于以上种种原因，所以在大二第二次选修课程的时候，我选择了人体解剖学这一科，当然学习过程中也收获颇多，在钱国强老师的讲解下，我们对人体自身的结构，内脏等各个部位都有了很深的理解和认识；同时，也学到了很多生活中的小常识，让我对人体解剖和生活医学小常识方面事实而非的东西变得逐渐清晰。 课堂上老师先给我们讲一些解剖的术语和人体结构的名称，有的我们都知道，但是大多数我们不知道的，人体解剖学的名称和术语繁多，所以学习它就需要记住他们，我们只是要求了解，我们中学学的是细胞、组织、器官、系统等，但是解剖学却是研究他们的方法。我们通过看解剖相关的图片和视频，了解了解剖的一些方法和过程，看起来时有些害怕，但想想那些在解剖的工作人员，我想他们肯定是有着非常好的心理素质，同时也让我想到了那些拿手术刀的医生，他们动手术也应该是一个解剖的过程，手术就是解剖学的应用之一吧，还有那些破案的法医也是通过解剖尸体获取相应的破案证据。只有正确认识了正常人体形态结构，才能充分认识其生理，生化过程以及病理变化，进而理解和掌握各种疾病的发生，发展，临床特征与诊治，预防原则。 我们学习解剖学主要讲的是人体的几大系统和结构，运动系统主要学习与运动相关的骨骼，有骨的分布，骨的连接，骨的构造和骨骼相关的骨骼肌等，然后

医学笔记：人体解剖学之呼吸系统

人体解剖学 之 呼吸系统 张桢

第五章呼吸系统 呼吸系统有输送气体的呼吸道和进行气体交换的肺两部分组成。呼吸道包括鼻、咽、喉、气管及各级支气管，它们的壁内均有骨或软骨作为支架，以维持呼吸道的通畅。临床上把鼻、咽、喉称为上呼吸道，把气管及各级支气管称为下呼吸道。 第一节呼吸道 一、鼻 鼻是呼吸道的门户，也是嗅觉器官，包括外鼻、鼻腔和鼻旁窦三部分。 （一）外鼻 外鼻位于两部中央，由鼻骨和软骨作支架，外被皮肤和少量皮下组织，内衬黏膜。外鼻上端位于两眼之间的部分称鼻根，向下延成鼻背，下端为鼻尖。 （二）鼻腔 鼻腔以骨和软骨为基础，表面衬以黏膜和皮肤。鼻腔被鼻中隔分为左、右两腔。每侧鼻腔向前经鼻孔与外界相通，向后经鼻后孔通鼻咽。 1、鼻前庭由鼻翼围成，内面衬以皮肤，生有鼻毛。鼻毛可阻挡灰尘吸入。 2、固有鼻腔位于鼻阈后上方，是鼻腔的主要部分，由骨和软骨覆以黏膜而成，其形态大

致与骨性鼻腔相同，临床所指鼻腔常指该部而言。 （1）鼻中隔由筛骨垂直板、犁骨及鼻中隔软骨覆以黏膜而成，是左右鼻腔的共同内侧壁，一般不完全居正中矢状位，往往是偏向一侧。 （2）鼻腔外侧壁鼻腔外侧壁形态复杂，自上而下有三个被覆粘膜的上、中、下鼻甲及各鼻甲下方的上、中、下鼻道。 （3）鼻黏膜按生理功能分为嗅区和呼吸区，上鼻甲内侧面以及与其相对的鼻中隔部分的鼻粘膜内含有嗅细胞，活体呈苍白或淡黄色，具有嗅觉功能，称为嗅区。其余的大部分称为呼吸区。 （三）鼻旁窦 鼻旁窦又称副鼻窦，是鼻腔周围含气颅骨的腔，内衬黏膜，对吸入的空气由加温、加湿作用，对发音起共鸣作用。 鼻旁窦有四对，分别是额窦、上颌窦、筛窦和蝶窦，筛窦又分前、中、后三群，四对鼻旁窦分别位于其同名颅骨内。 二、咽 （一）咽的位置和形态 咽是一个上宽下窄、前后略扁的漏斗形肌性管道，是消化和呼吸的共用通道，位于颈椎前方，上起颅底，下至第6颈椎下缘续于食管。

人体解剖学考试重点笔记+

人体解剖学 备课笔记 绪论 一、人体解剖学(human anatomy)：研究正常人体各器官形态、结构、位置、 毗邻关系及其发生发展规律的科学，属于 生物学中形态学的范畴。 目的：使学生理解和掌握人体各器官系统的形态结构特点及其相互关系，为学习其他基础医学和临床医学课程奠定必要的形态学基础。二、分类： 系统解剖学：将人体分成若干个系统，按各个系统进行形态结构等的 巨视解剖学叙述。 局部解剖学：将人体分成若干个部分，按部分

来阐明每一个局部有关 广义解剖学诸器官结构的层次排列、局部位置及毗邻关系。 细胞学 微视解剖学组织学 胚胎学 其他门类：断层解剖学、比较解剖学、运动解剖学、应用解剖学、生长解剖学、艺术解剖学等。 三、人体结构概述： （一）细胞＋间质组织器官系统人体 （二）人体九大系统： 1、运动系统： 2、消化系统； 3、呼吸系统； 4、泌尿系统； 5、生殖系统； 6、脉管系统； 7、内分泌系统； 8、感觉器； 9、神经系统。 （三）分部： 1、头部：颅、面。 2、颈部：颈、项。 3、躯干部：胸部、腹部、盆部。 4、四肢左、右上肢：肩、臂、前臂、手； 左、右下肢：臀、大腿、小腿、足。 四、人体解剖学的基本术语 （一）解剖学姿势：人体直立，面向前方，两眼平视正前方，两上肢下垂于 躯干两侧，手掌向前，两足并立，足尖向前。 （二）方位术语： 1、上（颅侧）：近头者下（尾侧）：近足者 2、前（腹侧）：近腹者后（背侧）：近背者 3、内侧：近正中面者外侧：远正中面者。 4、内与外：某结构与体腔或空腔脏器的相互位置关系，近腔者为内，远腔者为外。 5、浅、深：体内某点与体表间的距离，近皮肤者为浅，远者为深 近侧：靠近肢体附着者 6、四肢远侧：远离肢体附着者 内侧和外侧上肢：尺、桡 下肢：胫、腓 （三）轴和面 1、轴： 1）垂直轴：上、下方向走行； 2）矢状轴：前、后方向走行； 3）冠（额）状轴：左、右方向走行。 2、面： 1）矢状面（纵切面）：将人体分成左、右两半

半导体物理考研总结

1.布喇格定律（相长干涉）：点阵周期性导致布喇格定律。 2.晶体性质的周期性：电子数密度n(r)是r的周期性函数，存在 3.2πp/a被称为晶体的倒易点阵中或傅立叶空间中的一个点，倒易点中垂线做直线可得布里渊区。 3.倒易点阵： 4.衍射条件：当散射波矢等于一个倒易点阵矢量G时，散射振幅达到最大 波矢为k的电子波的布喇格衍射条件是： 一维情况（布里渊区边界满足布拉格）简化为： 当电子波矢为±π/a时，描述电子的波函数不再是行波，而是驻波（反复布喇格反射的结果） 5.布里渊区：

6.布里渊区的体积应等于倒易点阵初基晶胞的体积。 7.简单立方点阵的倒易点阵，仍是一个简立方点阵，点阵常数为2π/a，第一布里渊区是个以原点为体心，边长为2π/a的立方体。 体心立方点阵的倒易点阵是个面心立方点阵，第一布里渊区是正菱形十二面体。面心立方点阵的倒易点阵是个体心立方点阵，第一布里渊区是截角八面体。 8.能隙（禁带）的起因：晶体中电子波的布喇格反射－周期性势场的作用。（边界处布拉格反射形成驻波，造成能量差） 9.第一布里渊区允许的波矢总数=晶体中的初基晶胞数N －每个初基晶胞恰好给每个能带贡献一个独立的k值；

－直接推广到三维情况考虑到同一能量下电子可以有两个相反的自旋取向，于是每个能带中存在2N个独立轨道。 －若每个初基晶胞中含有一个一价原子，那么能带可被电子填满一半； －若每个原子能贡献两个价电子，那么能带刚好填满；初基晶胞中若含有两个一价原子，能带也刚好填满。 绝缘体：至一个全满，其余全满或空（初基晶胞的价电子数目为偶数,能带不交 叠）2N. 金属：半空半满 半导体或半金属：一个或两个能带是几乎空着或几乎充满以外，其余全满 （半金属能带交叠） 10.自由电 子： 11.半导体的E-k关系：

《人体解剖学》知识点全面大总结

人体解剖学知识点全面大总结 1．何谓人体解剖学姿势？ 答：人体解剖学姿势即身体直立两眼向前平视，下肢靠拢．足尖朝前，双上肢自然下垂于躯体干两侧，手掌朝前。 2．骨按形态可分为：长骨、短骨、扁骨、不规则骨． 3胸骨自上而下依次分为：胸骨柄、胸骨体、剑突。 4．成对的脑颅骨有：顶骨、颞骨．不成对的脑颅骨有：额骨、枕骨蝶骨、筛骨。 5．鼻旁窦有四对．包括：额窦、筛窦、蝶窦、上颌窦。 6．肩胛骨上能触及的骨性标志有：肩峰、上角、下角、肩胛冈、喙突、内侧缘． 7．椎间盘由纤维环和髓核构成。 8．胸廓是由12块胸椎、12对肋和1块胸骨借骨连结构成的． 9下颌关节由：下颌头与下颌窝构成．其关节腔内有：关节盘． La椎间孔：是指相邻椎骨的椎上切迹和椎下切迹所组成的孔．有脊神经和血管通过． 11胸骨角：胸骨柄与胸骨体相接处形成突向前方的横行隆起，称为胸骨角，可在体表摸到．他平对第二肋，为计数肋的重要标志。 12翼点：在颞窝区内有额、顶、颞、蝶四骨的汇合处．称为翼点此处骨质比较薄弱．其内面有脑膜中动脉前支经过．冀点处骨折时．容易损伤该动脉引起颅内血肿。 13椎间盘：椎间盘是上、下相邻两个椎体之间的纤维软骨盘．由周

围的纤维环和中央部的髓核构成． 14．腹股沟管：腹股沟管是指腹股沟韧带内侧半上方有一斜贯腹肌和腹膜的裂隙，为男性的精索或女性子宫圆韧带所通过。 15．试述淮骨的一般形态． 答：每块椎骨均由椎体和椎弓两部分构成．椎体位于前部，呈短圆柱状，椎弓附在椎体后方的弓状骨板，它与椎体围成椎孔椎弓与椎体相连的部分较细，称为椎弓根其上方有椎上切迹．下方有椎下切迹，相连椎骨的椎上下切迹组成椎间孔．两侧椎弓根向后内侧扩展为宽阔的骨板，称为椎弓板．每个椎弓伸出7个突起．即向两侧伸出一对横突．向上伸出一对上关节突向下伸出一对下关节突向后伸出单一的棘突． 16．写出鼻旁窦的名称及开口部位． 答：额窦开口于中鼻道下领窦开口于中鼻道．蝶窦开口于蝶筛隐 窝筛窦的前、中筛、小房开口于中鼻道．后筛小房开口于上鼻道17．试述肩关节的构成、形态特点和运动？ 答：肩关节由肩胛骨关节孟和肱骨头构成．其形态特点：(1）股骨头大，关节孟下而浅，周缘有孟唇加深，因此可作较大运动．(2) 关节囊薄而松弛，囊内有肚二头肌长头腱通过．囊的上、后和前部都有肌和肌健跨越，但前下部缺乏肌和肌健加强而较薄弱。肩关节为人体最灵活的关节．可作屈、伸；内收、外展；旋内、旋外及换转运动。 18．试述髋关节的构成、形态特点和运动？

半导体物理知识点

半导体物理知识点 1.前两章： 1、半导体、导体、绝缘体的能带的定性区别 2、常见三族元素：B(硼)、Al、Ga(镓)、In(铟)、TI(铊)。注意随着原子序数的增大， 还原性增大，得到的电子稳固，便能提供更多的空穴。所以同样条件时原子序数大的提供空穴更多一点、费米能级更低一点 常见五族元素：N、P、As(砷)、Sb(锑)、Bi(铋) 3、有效质量,m(ij)=hbar^2/(E对ki和kj的混合偏导) 4、硅的导带等能面，6个椭球，是k空间中[001]及其对称方向上的6个能量最低点， mt是沿垂直轴方向的质量，ml是沿轴方向的质量。 锗的导带等能面，8个椭球没事k空间中[111]及其对称方向上的8个能量最低点。 砷化镓是直接带隙半导体，但在[111]方向上有一个卫星能谷。此能谷可以造成负微分电阻效应。 2.第三章载流子统计规律: 1、普适公式 ni^2 = n*p ni^2 = (NcNv)^0.5*exp(-Eg/(k0T)) n = Nc*exp((Ef-Ec)/(k0T)) p = Nv*exp((Ev-Ef)/(k0T)) Nv Nc与 T^1.5成正比 2、掺杂时。注意施主上的电子浓度符合修正的费米分布，但是其它的都不是了，注意 Ef前的符号！ nd = Nd/(1+1/gd*exp((Ed-Ef)/(k0T)) gd = 2 施主上的电子浓度 nd+ = Nd/(1+gd*exp((Ef-Ed)/(k0T)) 电离施主的浓度 na = Na/(1+1/ga*exp((Ef-Ea)/(k0T)) ga = 4 受主上的空穴浓度 na- = Na/(1+ga*exp((Ea-Ef)/(k0T)) 电离受主浓度 3、掺杂时，电离情况。 电中性条件： n + na- = p + nd+ N型的电中性条件： n + = p + nd+ (1)低温弱电离区：记住是忽略本征激发。由n = nd+推导，先得费米能级，再代 入得电子浓度。Ef从Ec和Ed中间处，随T增的阶段。 (2)中间电离区：（亦满足上面的条件，即n = nd+），当T高于某一值时，Ef递减 的阶段。当Ef = Ed时，1/3的施主电离。（注意考虑简并因子！） (3)强电离区：杂质全部电离，且远大于本征激发，n = Nd,再利用2.1推导 (4)过渡区：杂质全部电离，本征激发加剧，n = Nd + p和n*p=ni^2联立 4、非简并条件 电子浓度exp((Ef-Ec)/(k0T))<<1 空穴浓度exp((Ev-Ef)/(k0T))<<1 这意味着有效态密度Nc和Nv中只有少数态被占据，近似波尔兹曼分布。不满足这 个条件时，即Ef在Ec之上或Ev之下则是简并情况。弱简并是指还在Eg之内，但 距边界小于2K0T。