<p>Okay, well, I'm not a senior but this is probably going to be something that I'll have to deal with next year, and I was just curious, so... Anyway:</p>
<p>What's better, going to a top school like Penn/Columbia/top LAC and doing pretty well (let's say like, a 3.5/3.6 average) or going to a good school like Barnard and being at the the top of your class (3.8/3.9) for grad school? Like, if someone wanted to go to Harvard or Yale or another really good university for law school or something like that, which route would be better? Financial aid is not an issue in this discussion.</p>
<p>I would say you're still the same you no matter where you go. If I were a grad school admissions officer (which I'm not), I would probably take both school and reputation into account and put it against the grades I saw. You also have standardized tests (i.e. GMAT, MCAT, GRE) as a kind of equalizing factor among those who went to your school and those who didn't.</p>
<p>I would think a 3.9 GPA would be better because your professors will probably all like you and give you great recommendations and give you extra attention and opportunities. There are no guarantees that you will get a 3.9 GPA, however. It might turn out lower. It's all guesswork which is why, ultimately, you should go to the school that appeals to you, and not worry about what the outcome will be.</p>