The other answer is correct, but it turns out that it becomes a little interesting if you work out the mathematics. I'm not sure how much you know of differential equations, but this is a fun problem to solve (with certain assumptions).
So let's consider an object falling through the Earth along the $y-$axis. At some arbitrary point (at a distance of, say, $y$) from the center, what will the force on it be? Well, it has mass all around it. It will be pulled towards the centre by the mass "below" it, and pulled back up by the mass "above" it. This seems like a complicated problem to solve, but we have an interesting theorem that can help us: Gauss's Law (for Gravity).
We can use this law by first drawing a closed sphere of radius $y$ from the centre of the Earth (the object will therefore lie on the surface of this sphere). The law states that the force experienced by the particle will just be:
$$\mathbf{F} = - G\, \frac{m_\text{obj} M_\text{enc}}{y^2}\mathbf{\hat{y}},$$
where $M_\text{enc}$ is the mass enclosed by the sphere. Obviously, as the object falls deeper and deeper into the Earth, this "enclosed mass" becomes smaller and smaller (since $y$ is reducing) and so, so is the force! Keep in mind that this law takes into account the effects of all the mass (even the stuff "above" the object you've dropped. It just turns out magically (mathematically?) given the symmetry of the problem to only depend on the enclosed mass.)
Using this, we can actually determine how the object will "move". The first thing to do is to find a general formula for the enclosed mass. I'm going to make the following assumption: the density of the earth is a constant $\rho$. It's not too bad an assumption, frankly, and no less realistic than actually drilling a hole through the Earth!
It should be easy to show that the mass of the Earth is related to its radius $R_E$ by:
$$M_\text{E} = \frac{4}{3}\pi R_E^3 \rho,$$
just as the enclosed mass is related to $y$ by
$$M_\text{enc} = \frac{4}{3}\pi y^3 \rho.$$
Given that we're assuming the density to be constant, it's very easy to show that
$$M_\text{enc} = M_E \left(\frac{y}{R}\right)^3,$$ which makes sense in all the limits.
We can now just plug this into Newton's Second Law to find the acceleration of the object: $$a = \frac{F}{m_\text{obj}},$$
and it's easy to show that
$$a = \frac{\text{d}^2 y}{\text{d} t^2} = -\frac{GM_E}{R^3} y.$$
This should be an equation that any first year physics undergraduate should recognise in their sleep, it's the equation for Simple Harmonic Motion!
So in other words, the object will oscillate in SHM, with a frequency given by $$\omega^2 = \frac{G M_E}{R^3},$$
and an amplitude $R_E$ (given that you dropped it from the surface on one end at rest). You could have found the time period using dimensional analysis as well, but I think it's cool to see this as an example of how ubiquitous the equation for SHM is in physics!