When my kid was considering Northeastern a few years ago, I was really impressed with how thoughtfully their CS curriculum had been designed. I’m not sure why they’ve now decided to scrap that approach; I realize this op-ed is only one person’s opinion, but I personally think their opinion has merit. Op-ed: Northeastern’s redesign of the Khoury curriculum abandons the fundamentals of computer science - The Huntington News
In your position, I would choose RPI. It has the intensity and rigor of GT, and a longstanding reputation for excellence in STEM. I am skeptical that your difference in earning potential with a GT degree, if in fact there is a difference, would be sufficient to cover six figures of student debt.
I appreciate the perspective that the more difficult job market in CS makes it important to obtain the most marketable degree possible. But we have all seen examples here of GT grads struggling to get their first jobs, too. For me, the more difficult job market means that it’s important to graduate debt free if at all possible, so that a longer job search after graduation wouldn’t be financially catastrophic.
While I have often recommended Northeastern for CS students, I think it is less “like Georgia Tech” than RPI is, and I would be uneasy about being a beta-tester for their new curriculum approach. Also, while I think it’s great to have a co-op option, I’m a little concerned, with the constricting job market, about the ever-growing number of NEU CS students all being able to get their required co-op placements.
So I’d be most comfortable with RPI, as a more “GT-like” school at less than half the GT price, which will give you a highly-respected degree without debt.