So I am not going to life, I was a little disappointed with the FEATS. Maybe it is my fault for not being educated before the assessment, but since the rating scale for the DDS is the FEATS, I thought I would get a diagnosis. But since we do not diagnose, I thought at least I would get an idea of specific pathology, but no! It really only measures if the client is presenting pathological behavior or not. I guess that is all right, but I was expecting more. I think for my purposes, I would rather use an assessment that can indicate some specific pathology. Is it possible to assess the artwork for the DDS with Lowenfeld’s levels of graphic development? Maybe the PPAT would be beneficial, if it was looking at specific pathology.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 Response to One foot, Two FEATS
not going to "lie", right? The FEATS is the scale for the PPAT. The DAF is the scale for the DDS. The DAF provides pathological vs. non-pathological criteria while the FEATS coincides with DSM criteria. Remember how we read that "schizophrenia presents as"... "Bipolar presents as..." ? The FEATS allows for pattern matching and provides opportunities for classification of the characteristics, which may be useful for diagnosing. Remember the use of the term "graphic equivalents"? For instance, in class the "DSM Symptom" and "Observations in Art" were linked to the "FEATS Scales." An example is: Major Depression-Dark colors- depressed mood- Scales 1 and 2. Another example would be: Mania- abundant details, expansive use of space, swirling or looping lines - flight of ideas, distractibility- FEATS Scales 3, 4, 10, 11.
Post a Comment