The distinction is usually referred to as saltwater vs freshwater economists (referring to the geographical location of the university's). Apart from MIT there is also Princeton and Stanford in the saltwater camp.

And Krugman is right that the saltwater economists were vindicated by the recovery from the GFC.

However Krugman is not a good spokesperson for saltwater economists. Most econ professors I know from saltwater university's say they cannot even understand his points (note that Krugman did not win his Nobel prize for macro, but for trade).

In particular he is wrong to bundle together views on debt crises, recessions, and general attitudes to the free market. By the time you are in a debt crisis, it's a bit late to stimulate the economy with even more government debt. At some point you actually have to figure out a way to pay money back.