Worth noting that the "1st Class Honours" thing is just the level of a degree in some places (e.g. the UK). I can appreciate it sounds funny to some people, but then grade point averages and summa cum laude sound odd to me! :-)
In the Australian academic system, most degrees are taught as a 3-year program.
Some students are then invited to take an honours year, during which they will take postgraduate courses and undertake a research project.
That I earned "first class" means I earned a distinction for my project and maintained a distinction average for my coursework.
The difference with the US system is that the honours year is meant to prepare you to move directly into a PhD without needing further coursework. In the US system, when you take a PhD you do some coursework first and can terminate early with a Masters.
Basically you're just arbitrarily attaching "status" and "results" labels to things.
It's an argument I can't win, because by raising my own achievements by way of disclaimer[1], I am "bragging", which is a "status orientation" on my part.
But the fact that I worked towards a measurable goal in a structured way according to a plan of my own design -- that somehow isn't results-seeking behaviour?
[1] because usually, these discussions boil down to an argument between people with a degree and people without a degree -- and there's a strong correlation between the pro-degree/contra-degree camp and who has a degree.
