¶ … wrong for the applicants to take an unauthorized peek at their application files. The intent of the school was clearly to have those files closed, so the viewing of those files was a breach of the school's intentions. There is an implicit duty on the part of the applicant to avoid looking at those files, even if the opportunity presents itself. Many of the candidates in question apply a consequentialist view of the ethics surrounding this situation. However, the schools are applying a deontological view. That there were no negative consequences related to viewing the files is irrelevant in this situation because the issue relates to trust. With trust, there is always a categorical imperative and trust therefore needs to be maintained at all times. The candidates in question violated the trust that they were attempting to form between themselves and the school. As a result, these candidates committed an act that they should not have.

The applicants should have considered that they have an obligation to uphold the reputation of the school. These business schools all have very good reputations, and they wish to be seen as having the highest standards not only of performance but integrity as well. The candidates should have been aware that looking at the files would reflect poorly on themselves, and that the schools would see somebody that has questionable...

This ties in with the ideals that the schools have. The ideals center around integrity, excellence and character. When an applicant demonstrates a lack of these things, the school sees that candidate as being somebody that will not represent the school well in the future. It is important for these schools that their graduates reflect well on them, so they are careful to ensure that the students they accept have a high level of integrity and high ethical standards. The applicants should have considered that they might face negative consequences for their actions. They should have realized that they are not anonymous when accessing web pages -- especially ones specific to a single person -- and acted accordingly. In analyzing the situation from a consequentialist point-of-view, they neglected to look at the potential consequences for themselves.
There is a generation gap to some extent on this issue. Current students do tend to view the Internet as somehow different from the rest of the world with respect to ethics -- the file-sharing debate is a good example of this schism. However, two points need to be mentioned. The first is that the applicants had to realize that they are not being measured by the standards of their peers but by the standards of the admissions departments at prestigious universities. The second point is…