<p>
</p>
<p>You view what differently?</p>
<p>I made no assertion about the absolute value of grades v. test scores. I do believe that, given a well-calibrated and administered grading system, grades (along with course selection) should be a better indicator of student qualifications than test scores. This should not be considered a controversial statement (nor one at odds with common admissions practices). However, when the average entering student at UCSD has a 3.96 average, it suggests to me that grades in California public schools are inflated. Of course some alternate explanation is possible. I see that 100% of UCSD students ranked in the top 10% of their hs classes. So maybe the California state university system does an good job of identifying over-achievers whose GPAs truly reflect high standing in their schools, despite relatively modest test scores. </p>
<p>I think the more important point, if cost is no object for the OP, is that top private schools tend to be less numbers-driven than top public schools. They take a holistic approach to admissions. An applicant whose scores and grades are imbalanced needs to consider the potential effects of this difference in choosing schools. Specifically, if you are just outside the top 10%, but your other qualifications (including scores) are excellent, you may have a better chance of admission to a top private school than to UCSD.</p>