I'd like to give my reaction to Elizabeth Watkins' sentiments, while certainly meaning no offense to anyone on this list.  I was unlucky enough to get deeply interested and involved in local history and museums only AFTER completing a B.A. in an unrelated field.  While holding whatever jobs I could find in my geographic area, I volunteered the equivalent of approximately a forty hour work week per month between the local historical society, the city's landmarks commission, and the complete restoration of a decrepit gristmill into a working museum.  I took on whatever needed to be done- chairing meetings, handling publicity, training docents, cataloguing, photographing, writing policies, researching.  Upon moving to a large city, I was hopeful that these activities would help me land an entry level job in the local history or preservation fields, but I have had no success.  Going back for another degree is financially out of the question.  I've found that, without a degree in museum studies or perhaps history, nine years of solid volunteer experience, no matter how challenging,  is not enough to even get a foot in the door at most places (so take heart, Elizabeth)..
        I don't want a job in this field because I have some mistaken impression that it will make me wealthy; I want it because this is what I care about doing and I think I do it well.  Turning a passion into a vocation is not a simple task.  I'd ask those who do the hiring in this field to take ALL of a person's experiences into account.  You may get applicants like Elizabeth who have a degree that speaks of a long-term commitment to education, or people like myself who have volunteered extensively in order to gain practical knowledge.  Either way, museums are doing themselves a disservice if they slight one type of experience in favor of another.

Respectfully,
Steve Frevert