Piagetsky

Started undergrad at 33, master's at 38, starting a PhD program at 40.  Professors I inteviewed with said my life/work experiences were what caught their attention.  

Having worked with my supervisor who we have nicknamed Mr. Spicycoating (OK not in English - this sounds weird in English, but it sorta translates as the opposite of sugarcoating) I know how it feels to get criticism (My first draft of my first proposal in not my first language I got comments like 'This sentence is so hard to digest it gives me reflux.' Thanks man). 
Second - realize there is no 'perfect' experiment - at least not when you're in the social sciences (I assume you are). There are always concessions to make on the sample (including size and who to include), methodology, etc. So I'd say try to let go of devising the perfect study - this has always helped me as I'm a perfectionist. Concessions, especially if you work with multiple people are also gonna happen. I constantly have to negotiate with my supervisor as he's the type to love flashy findings - and I'm the type that rather does solid research. So I'm often trying to convince him to let go of things that could potentially be flashy. You're now negotiating with your committee - that's cool. It will help you and your project.  One of the biggest things you'd have to learn as a scientist is flexibility, negotiation (this is not the same as a compromise though!) and persuasion. It's an excellent opportunity to learn  Your feedback has been very constructive -  so you should feel happy about that! They didn't say it was a bad idea - just there are some things that need extra thinking!
That being said, there are a number of points they want you to address or provide a better rationale for. From what I read, they have some issues with your choice of 'who' you want to study. It seems like this is the biggest problem underlying all things from what you said. Why this group? Could you maybe study the same topic/subjects from a different angle (i.e., story or approach)? Are you very much attached to this specific group? It could also be an opportunity to study something that's maybe more closely related to your PhD goals/topic. This of course depends on your future goals.
Honestly, for me, I love criticism. It makes my topic better, it helps my thinking to mature, it makes me aware of thinks or hurdles I didn't think about yet, etc. It's a good thing. I always focus on what I gain from having had the experience (i.e., what did I learn). It always makes my work better in some way (even if it's just in the eyes of others). I try not to be emotionally attached to my work and am getting better at it (thanks to my supervisor lol - love him though). I always say I take my work very seriously, but not myself. I can let go of things of very fast. Plus criticism is part of academic life (*cough* reviewer 2 *cough*) so we all need to find strategies to deal with this.
Also having had this criticism and questions now and if you address them - you won't face the same questions at the conference. And even if, you'd know how to answer them! August is still far away, and sometimes things move slow, something things move fast. Don't be too hung up on timelines but just try to move as fast as you're able to - that's what I generally try to do. 
If you're worried or need to vent - find me in a PM. This is what I go through on a biweekly base it seems.

Started undergrad at 33, master's at 38, starting a PhD program at 40.  Professors I inteviewed with said my life/work experiences were what caught their attention.  

Started undergrad at 33, master's at 38, starting a PhD program at 40.  Professors I inteviewed with said my life/work experiences were what caught their attention.  

Started undergrad at 33, master's at 38, starting a PhD program at 40.  Professors I inteviewed with said my life/work experiences were what caught their attention.  

Started undergrad at 33, master's at 38, starting a PhD program at 40.  Professors I inteviewed with said my life/work experiences were what caught their attention.  

Started undergrad at 33, master's at 38, starting a PhD program at 40.  Professors I inteviewed with said my life/work experiences were what caught their attention.  

Started undergrad at 33, master's at 38, starting a PhD program at 40.  Professors I inteviewed with said my life/work experiences were what caught their attention.  

Well, their deadline for applications was much later compared to the other two schools I applied to (which is why I didn't bother with OGS at U of T) so it's possible that they release results later as well (?) That's just a guess though...

Sounds like you are more excited about the second program! 
I won't go into debt for a master program, it is not worth it. 

I'd focus on getting some publications. I was told that it doesn't reflect well on people with Master's degrees if they're not applying with at least one publication. If you did a thesis, that would be a good thing to try to get published. 

CCP ...there so many abbreviations! Word is that news has gone out for several other OISE programs too. All through e-mail / SGS from what I've heard. 

OP, you're an adult. You get to live your own life and make your own decisions. Your parents don't get to make your decisions for you and they won't live your life for you. It seems to me that you came into your BA wanting a certain career, and having pursued some education and practical training in it, you've discovered it's not what you want. You've also discovered a new passion. Tell your parents that. A PhD would be funded, as you say, so you won't go into debt. And you'll have career options in and outside of academia. You don't have to justify yourself to them, but it's good to have answers to some question they may ask (what kind of jobs, how much do they pay, how long is the training, what schools are you considering). You may also want to think about what you want to tell them as far as personal questions go (when you might start a family, where you might live, etc). Understand their concerns for you and that they want what's best for you, but stand your ground that it's your life and your decision to make. Also keep in mind that while this decision has been brewing for a while inside your head, it's going to come as a surprise to them. Give them the space to digest what you're telling them. 

I am an international applicant from China (got a masters in mental health counseling in the US). I applied to 13 clinical psych programs last year and got 13 rejections. I applied to 9 educational psychology programs (with a concentration in measurement and statistics) and 1 quantitative psychology programs and got 7 offers.
How do you make of my experience? I think sometimes your choices are more important than your working hard.
That said, I don't think switching from clinical psych to quant psych programs is the only reason why I am much more successful than last year.
You should work hard but also work smarter.
In my case, after the first failed cycle, I re-evaluated my strengths and weaknesses, and realized that quant might be more suitable for me. I've always interested in statistics and I'm good at coding, so why apply for clinical psych and fail again instead of working on my strengths? 
I did an independent study using R and wrote a strong writing sample about it;
I built a personal academic site and published my writing sample and CV on it;
I rewrote my SOPs and customized them to each program;
I contacted all of my POIs 1-1.5 months prior to the app deadline;
I didn't retake and improve my GRE scores because they were already decent;
I asked the same letter writers to write my letters.
I think one of the reasons why some people fail repeatedly is that they haven't realized where their true strengths lie. They don't spend time talking to themselves and trying to figure out who they are. They just follow what other people do, like applying for clinical psych programs. Once they figure that out, things would become much easier.
 

I received an offer from the U of A for the SCCP program on Tuesday and was told from a POI to expect a U of C SACP offer right away. Decision time!

That "under review" never changes (mine was still under review from 2 years ago), so that portal is not very informative.  From what I understand, the committee met late January and the profs had to have their selections in the first week of February.  Informal offers have been extended, and official letters are going out early March-ish. 

No.  I emailed them today too but was told to just watch my online account.  Wasn't told anything about waitlists but the impression I got was that I shouldn't assume rejection necessarily despite not having been interviewed.  Similar to Calgary, first round of interviews and rejections have definitely gone out but this rolling admission malarkey may mean we have a chance. 

Yes! Been lovely every time I reached out.  Gave the impression they will do another round of interviews with waitlisted applicants.

For anyone wondering about Calgary, I just emailed the department to ask about the progress of my own application.   I was told that the initial round of interview invites and rejections went out weeks ago and that anyone not contacted should consider themselves on the waitlist.  It won't be long before the next wave happens but I was not given a time scale.

I didn't drink alcohol at any of the socials during my application season and no one said anything.  If someone had asked I wouldn't have felt the need to explain myself either.  I'll drink what I want, end of story.

Just received email from POI that I’ve been recommended for admission and I’ll be receiving an official offer in the mail shortly
this group seriously kept me sane through my insane anxiety. Thank you all ? 

Classism in graduate school is a topic that has been discussed ad-noseum. It sucks, but being from higher SES probably helps you get in to grad school and stay there (not just in psychology). 
 
Honestly,  if an applicant showed up to the program I presently attend for an interview wearing anything less than business casual, that is a HUGE red flag. Interviews are professional, and you should dress accordingly. It's not going to get any easier (at least in clinical)... wearing nothing less than business casual is an expectation of our year 2 practicum and many external practicums in our area. If you can't put on something professional to dazzle on interview day, I think that also has broader implications about how you may dress around patients. 
 
Not exactly sure why OP felt called to post this as a current applicant, but the point is nonetheless valid. 

I don’t disagree that their comments could be perceived as catty. I at first felt that way. It does seem superficial. But, honestly, it is not. Again, it’s very much a reflection of commitment and professionalism. It’s not a casual event. That really goes for any interview. Is that fair? Maybe not. But I would never wear a sweater and casual pants to an interview, let alone a PhD interview. We’re all poor students, some more than others. But you can borrow clothes, go to thrift stores, try your best to plan ahead. You spent hundreds of dollars applying. If you show up too casually dressed you could be perceived as not taking the interview seriously  I am in no way talking about clothing brands or expensive clothing but dressing for the occasion  
It doesn’t seem fair, but in this climate of interviewing, it is unfortunately a factor. Am I saying show up in a $300 suit? Heck no. But dress up a bit, at least business casual.
In regards to the comments, I merely overheard the PhD students discussing it over whispers. They weren’t publicly proclaiming it. I didn’t find what they said catty so much as very relevant to the applicant in question’s lack of good judgement.

So, I obviously won’t name names or programs, but at one of the interviews I went to in clinical psychology an applicant showed up in a sweater and what at first looked like jeans but were more casual grey ponte pants. I also had  another interview in a past cycle where someone wore a cocktail dress and cocktail sling back shoes. 
At both I was with applicants that were all in some sort of suit expect them. They stood out and not in a good way.
I don’t know if anyone else has encountered this. But I felt I needed to post about this because what you choose to wear is so so important. It reflects your sincerity, judgement, and professionalism. You’ve done a lot of work up to this point and to dress that way for an interview is short changing yourself and will raise eyebrows. In fact, in both cases I overheard current PhD students discussing them specifically and stating it was bizarre, embarrassing for them, that they lacked good judgement. 
Everyone is on a budget, has things they can’t control, but if you have an interview to come, please make something work that’s appropriate for the day otherwise you’re shortchanging yourself and shifting the focus not to you and your fit (no pun intended) and qualifications but something that you can more readily control!

Hey Anne,
That's cool but, we are applicants and honestly, we don't really care about spam emails form schools when every email we get we are hoping is an invite...so I don't care about their grad week unless it is AFTER I get an invite of some sort, and at that point, I am all ears and fully committed!