Author: Emma Schmitt

This blog post series will look at United States citizens who trained abroad and are currently practicing conservation in the US. The goal of these interviews is twofold: to provide pre-program students with a starting point for understanding international training through a range of student perspectives and to bring awareness of overseas conservation training programs to conservators practicing in the United States. It is the hope that the discussion of international training will answer questions and start an open dialog of the challenges and benefits of training abroad.

This blog series takes the form of interviews with established and emerging conservators who have trained abroad. Each interviewee offers their personal and professional perspective. So, while themes are apparent throughout these interviews, no single interview can summarize all the challenges and rewards of international training.

These interviews do not reflect the opinions of AIC or the training programs being discussed. The series has been created to reflect a range of experiences, and the personal accounts will not reflect the views of all students from any specific program.

 

What is Your Name, Specialty and Current position?

 My name is Sean Belair. I am an Assistant Conservator in the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Department of Arms and Armor. I am an objects conservator, but I have primarily specialized in the conservation of arms, armor, and related material.

 

Why did you pick your specialty?

My specialty picked me. Since I was a child, I have always had an interest in the Middle Ages, material history, and archaeology in general. I also loved making things and working with my hands. Until I discovered conservation, I always thought those would be separate pursuits. Arms and armor conservation combines my greatest passions into a single profession.

 

Can you describe your training pathway?

 I went to college to study Medieval and Renaissance history. While searching for history internships for my sophomore summer, I came across a pre-program internship in the conservation of arms and armor at the Higgins Armory Museum in Worcester, Massachusetts. On day one of this internship, I knew conservation was the career for me.

The conservator I worked with at the Higgins had started twenty years prior and trained on the job; many people he had worked with during that time had not gone through a conservation program, either. Believing the ‘apprentice’ route was the best way to achieve my goals, I continued to pursue pre-program internships. By the time I realized that you could no longer become a conservator without an MA, I was already into my junior year. As a history major, there was no way I could meet the course requirements for the US programs without essentially getting another BA. Another conservator, who now happens to be the Met’s Armorer and my direct supervisor, recommended I look into programs abroad, as he had received an MSc in archaeological conservation from University College London.

When I was looking at programs in England, the University of Lincoln jumped out. Lincoln focuses on the conservation of historic objects, as opposed to archaeology or fine arts, and they take hands-on training very seriously. Students start treating objects their first week.

The general philosophy of the program is that graduates will probably go on to work in, or for, the historic houses of the UK and should be prepared to work on every type of material inside the house, including the building itself. Lincoln has a commercial wing that specializes in historic interiors. While I wanted to focus on metal objects specifically, arms and armor, like many museum objects, are mixed-media. All programs address mixed-media, but I felt that at Lincoln it was a major part of the curriculum.

The Lincoln program was also a two year program. Lincoln has a BA program, so the MA is only one additional year if you have done the undergraduate training. For people who received a BA in other fields, like me, they offer a one year Graduate Diploma course to catch you up with the MA. So, in two years (1 year GD + 1 year MA) I walked away with an MA in objects conservation, whereas similar programs required three years. In my mind, I was able to enter the workforce a year earlier, with a year’s less tuition. As I had hands-on pre-program experience and had taken the “Chemistry for Conservators” correspondence course, I didn’t feel like I would be overwhelmed by the condensed program or unprepared after graduation.

After Lincoln, I worked on outdoor sculpture for the New York City Parks Department, first as a summer intern, then staying on for another major project. It was during this time I applied for a Summer Graduate Internship in Arms and Armor Conservation at the Met, which I was awarded.

After a year of semi-employment and volunteering, I was awarded a Met Fellowship in Arms and Armor Conservation, which was subsequently renewed for another year. Just before the end of my second fellowship, our senior conservator (The Armorer) announced his retirement after 43 years with the museum. His retirement created an opening in the department, which I gratefully filled.

 

What were the advantages of your program of choice: Personal/Professional

I feel the ‘historic house’ approach, stressing mixed-media objects, has thoroughly prepared me for my career. In my work I have come across some very unusual combinations of materials and conditions, and I have never felt unprepared. I can’t say I’ve always known the right treatment or course of action, but I’ve always known where to start, and more importantly, when to stop.

While Lincoln wants you to be prepared for everything, they are very accommodating of specialties. One student, for example, chose to specialize in restoring ship models, and the lecturers found models for him to treat; another classmate decided she wanted to focus on textiles, so one of the lecturers built her a suction-table out of Cor-X, duct tape, and a vacuum. Both students went on to work in their chosen specialty.

The program did a particularly good job of preparing students to deal with display and storage environments. The course anticipates students will be working in unideal conditions with limited resources and teaches the students to find creative solutions to stabilizing environments. To reinforce the lectures and readings, all MA’s must do a survey of a historic structure in Lincoln including monitoring temperature, humidity, and light-levels through changing seasons, and make recommendations on improving the stability of the environment.

While I attended Lincoln, we were in an 18^th century former hospital turned seminary, turned lab. It was atmospheric, but cramped and poorly laid out. The program has since moved into a brand new building shared with the art department. The lecturers were able to custom design the conservation space before construction even began. I was able to visit a couple of years ago, and it is a beautiful facility. The students also have access to the new art studios and have designated times where they are encouraged to practice manufacturing techniques like jewelry making and carpentry.

The tuition for the program is less than at other universities, and the cost of living in Lincoln is low. Additionally, Lincoln is only a two-year program instead of three, further reducing cost.

 

What were the disadvantages of your program of choice: Personal/Professional

 I would say that one disadvantage is that Lincoln is a young program. Most conservators have heard of it, but it does not yet carry the cache of University College London or New York University. Being a young program also means there are fewer Lincoln alumni to network with, particularly in the US; where, to my knowledge, I am the only Lincoln alum.

While the two-year program worked for me, it might not be right for everyone. The structure only provides the summer between the GD and the MA to have a placement/internship before graduation. If you do not have any pre-program experience, then you are putting a lot of pressure on that one summer for building your resume and portfolio.

Of course, two years studying in England is two years away from friends and family. I was fortunate to have a very supportive girlfriend, now wife, and things like Skype and FaceTime make the distance easier, but it is still distance. That said, away is away, regardless of the country. I can’t say attending Buffalo, at the opposite end of my home state, would have been much easier than Lincoln.

There is, of course, the financial component. Going to school in England is not free and flights are expensive. It made sense for me because I wouldn’t have been eligible for the endowed American programs without spending significant time and money continuing to take undergraduate classes.

 

What advice do you have for pre-programmers considering a similar path

Picking a program is an important decision; you will spend several years there, after all, but it will not make or break your career. Your career will be defined by equal of parts hard work and dumb luck – comforting, I know. So my advice isn’t about picking a program, but planning ahead.

Start working on your portfolio as soon as possible. This will be what defines you to a potential employer. Get a good camera if you can and learn to take well-lit, in-focus pictures (though I’ve gotten good pictures with just my iPhone). Take lots of photos of everything you work on, and have other people take photos of every type of activity you perform. A portfolio or website is only as strong as the images it contains, and it is very easy to forget to take them or inadvertently get bad photos; either way, you will be pulling your hair out when you’re trying to put your material together.

A potential employer will Google you, so having a website and/or a ‘curated’ social media feed is a great way to promote yourself. I never made a website, but I believe it will be a must-have going forward.

 

 

 

 This blog post series will look at United States citizens who trained abroad and are currently practicing conservation in the US. The goal of these interviews is twofold: to provide pre-program students with a starting point for understanding international training through a range of student perspectives and to bring awareness of overseas conservation training programs to conservators practicing in the United States. It is the hope that the discussion of international training will answer questions and start an open dialog of the challenges and benefits of training abroad.

This blog series takes the form of interviews with established and emerging conservators who have trained abroad. Each interviewee offers their personal and professional perspective. So, while themes are apparent throughout these interviews, no single interview can summarize all the challenges and rewards of international training.  

These interviews do not reflect the opinions of AIC or the training programs being discussed. The series has been created to reflect a range of experiences, and the personal accounts will not reflect the views of all students from any specific program.

What is Your Name, Specialty and Current position?

Noah Smutz, Books and Library Materials, Book Conservator at Smithsonian Libraries

Why did you pick your specialty? 

As I became interested in conservation, the functional aspect of books greatly appealed to me. I view books as organic machines and enjoy the problem solving involved in making them function as books again. The variety and ingenuity found in historical bookbindings are also a large draw for me. I enjoy studying the different ways that have been developed to bind a book.

Can you describe your training pathway? 

I began my training pathway my junior year of undergrad. I had come to the decision that I no longer wanted to pursue a career in Archaeology and began exploring a career in conservation. I got a job in the Stannard Conservation Lab at the University of Kansas as a student worker treating general collections materials under the supervision of Whitney Baker and Roberta Woodrick. Within a month, I knew that I wanted to become a book conservator.

My supervisors’ willingness to help and their advice proved invaluable. They directed me to begin taking chemistry courses, to explore what options there were for book conservation in graduate school, and to keep an eye out for internship opportunities. These discussions took place in the fall of 2011, after the University of Texas program had shut its doors, but before Buffalo, Delaware, and NYU had provided publicly available information about how these programs were going to add book conservation education. Even had this information been available, I would not have given the American programs much consideration. All three programs have significant requirements around studio art. I did not come from an artistic background nor did I think for my desired specialty that investing the time in studio art courses (and further delaying graduate school) would be a good return on investment.

Very early in my graduate school explorations, I began looking abroad for English-speaking graduate schools because I did not want to try and do a graduate degree in a non-native language. I quickly found Camberwell’s and West Dean College’s programs. West Dean immediately appealed to me. A school in a converted manor house, set on an idyllic estate of 6,400 acres, and a program started by the late Christopher Clarkson equipped with equipment from Roger Powell and Peter Waters’ workshop (though I didn’t learn that fact until much later). I don’t think I am overstating to say that these three men were all extremely influential on the development of book conservation as a field in the United Kingdom and the United States. I found the idea of going to a program, even only tangentially linked to these men, extremely appealing.

West Dean was the only program that I applied to in the fall of 2011. West Dean does offer the option of a Skype interview, but I felt if I were going to invest two years in graduate school I wanted to see the place before going. When I visited in early 2012 for an interview, I knew West Dean was the correct fit for me. Their emphasis on developing hand skills, studying and recreating historical bindings, and a 6-week work placement in the second year cemented my belief it was the correct school for me. I was offered a spot beginning fall of 2013 as they had already filled the class beginning that fall. I had hoped to go straight from undergrad to graduate school. However, this was a blessing in disguise as it allowed me a year to save money for school and gain more experience.

In the summer of 2013 I interviewed for multiple internships and was awarded a paid internship at the Smithsonian Archives under the supervision of Nora Lockshin. This was my first experience working with special collections materials and proved to be a great launching pad as I entered West Dean.

While at West Dean, I had the opportunity to work with many visiting conservators and to spend six weeks as an intern at the Bodleian Library in Oxford. Once I completed my masters degree, I did not find full time employment immediately. I moved back to the United States and lived with my parents in St. Louis while doing private work and applying for jobs. During this time I worked on many family bibles, as well as projects for the St. Louis Art Museum, Nelson Atkins Art Museum, and the Missouri State Archives. My job search began while I was still a student at West Dean and spanned 22 months, 40 positions applied for, and 3 second places before getting my current position at Smithsonian Libraries. I believe part of the reason this search took so long is because my professional network was UK-based. During my first year back in the States I worked diligently to expand my network of American conservators attending conferences and workshops, getting to know the conservators in my local area, and joining organizations I was not yet a part of (the Guild of Bookworkers and the Midwest Conservation Guild). In addition I sent cold-call style emails to as many book and paper conservators as I could get email addresses for. These emails did not lead to a position but I received a surprisingly high percentage of responses (above 90%). The replies tended to include encouragement to keep looking and to not get discouraged. I believe building a network is important because knowing someone, or knowing someone they know can be the difference in getting or not getting a position.

 

What were the advantages of your program of choice: 

West Dean’s greatest advantage is its emphasis on developing hand skills and teaching conservation science in an extremely practical way. Week one in the Books program involved making a paring knife out of a hacksaw blade, in order to understand the materiality of our tools as well as to learn how to sharpen knives (an invaluable skill for a book conservator), and documentation and treatment of a clothbound book. From this starting point, more and more treatments were added to our slate as well as scientific research papers and bookbinding projects. This resulted in spending 30-40 hours a week for 72 weeks spread over two years treating objects and learning bookbinding (research and writing accounting for another 10-20 hours a week). I went from being able to confidently work on certain types of general collections repairs to confidently working on anything found in a special collections library. This is a result of the high emphasis on hand skills at West Dean.

The weekly three-hour chemistry, biology, and physics lectures at West Dean were specifically tailored to provide the knowledge students need to become successful conservators. In addition to these lectures, every lesson was reinforced in the workshop. We would go directly from a science lecture about the chemical makeup of collagen and how it degrades to looking at samples of leather at different levels of degradation. Personally, I know of no better way to learn and remember scientific concepts, learning the abstract scientific concept and immediately seeing how it manifests in objects.

The program at West Dean is also loosely structured, which allows for the exploration of personal interests. For example, I have a scholarly interest in bookbinding structures dating roughly from 500-1500 AD. I was able to do research projects learning about these bindings, while my classmates researched other things of interest to them, all as part of the program. This flexibility is a real asset of West Dean’s program structure and dovetails nicely with the flexibility required in the field of conservation to successfully treat objects.

What were the disadvantages of your program of choice? 

Going abroad to graduate school does not come with the same financial advantages as going to an American program does. The cost can range from $30,000 to $60,000 and will vary dramatically and constantly due to the exchange rate. I was able to make this cost work through a combination of generosity on the part of my family as well as bursaries (scholarships) from West Dean that in the end accounted for approximately 40% of my tuition costs.

West Dean draws its strength from being deeply rooted in the handcrafts that created the objects we conserve. This is a wonderful thing. But just as technology has uprooted much of society within the last 30 years, it has had profound effects on conservation workflows as well. And it should not come as a surprise that a place so rooted in handcraft has been (in some but not all ways) slow to adapt to these changes.

A disadvantage of West Dean is (through no fault of its own) that it is not as well known in the United States. Conservators generally know what they’re getting from a Texas, Buffalo, Delaware, NYU, or North Bennet Street graduate. But they are not as certain when dealing with West Dean because usually they are not as familiar with how the program works. I have run into this at many professional conferences as well as in many job interviews. I have developed a 5-minute informational lecture to help introduce West Dean to people (if you see me at a conference I’ll gladly share it with you!). At times, I have had to deal with the opinion that the training at West Dean is lesser than what is offered in the United States. I do my best to show that this is incorrect. The education offered at West Dean is not better or worse than those offered elsewhere, it is different, but different does not mean lesser.

What advice do you have for pre-programmers considering a similar path?

Speak to graduates! We all know the struggles of the pre-program phase and facing life-altering decisions related to our education. We are happy to answer questions and provide advice! If you’re a pre-programmer reading this feel free to contact me with any questions you have!

Regardless of what program you look to attend, if you plan to work in the field in a different country from the program make sure you are building your network of colleagues in the country you want to work in. These networks are invaluable professionally in a field as specialized as ours and can lead to wonderful friendships within the profession.

If you are faced with the attitude within the field that programs abroad are lesser than the American programs, remember that all the countries those programs are based in have incredible museums and works of art. The majority of the conservators working on those objects are trained in their home countries. If that training is good enough there, it is good enough for the States. During my job search, I constantly reminded myself of this fact. Going abroad is not an easier path than the American programs or a lesser path than the American programs it is only different, no better, no worse.

 

Noah is a book conservator at Smithsonian Libraries and can be contacted at: ndsmutz@gmail.com

 

 This blog post series will look at United States citizens who trained abroad and are currently practicing conservation in the US. The goal of these interviews is twofold: to provide pre-program students with a starting point for understanding international training through a range of student perspectives and to bring awareness of overseas conservation training programs to conservators practicing in the United States. It is the hope that the discussion of international training will answer questions and start an open dialog of the challenges and benefits of training abroad.

 This blog series takes the form of interviews with established and emerging conservators who have trained abroad. Each interviewee offers their personal and professional perspective. So, while themes are apparent throughout these interviews, no single interview can summarize all the challenges and rewards of international training.

These interviews do not reflect the opinions of AIC or the training programs being discussed. The series has been created to reflect a range of experiences, and the personal accounts will not reflect the views of all students from any specific program.

Our first interviewee is Emma Schmitt, a 2014 graduate of The University of Glasgow, Centre for Textile Conservation and Technical Art History.

 

What is Your Name, Specialty and Current position?

Emma Schmitt, Textiles, Mellon Fellow at Denver Museum of Art

Why did you pick your specialty?

I chose textiles because I come from a family of fiber crafters. My mother taught me embroidery when I was eight, starting a life-long passion for what could be done with needle and thread. I did everything from making clothes to quilts, and dabbled in tatting and knitting. In college, I made costumes for theatre productions and was recruited to work for a resident opera company, where I eventually managed the costume shop for a summer. Fibers and textiles are part of who I am; I cannot imagine working in any other specialty.

Can you describe your training pathway?

In 2006, I began working at the Buffalo Museum of Science in Buffalo, New York where I assisted with inventory, collections management, integrated pest management, and exhibit installation. I helped to install objects treated by the Buffalo State conservation students and learned about the field of conservation. That fall I began my undergraduate degree in Archaeology and continued to work at the Buffalo Museum of Science.. In additional to completing more coursework to prepare for graduate school, I worked at ICA-Art Conservation (5 months) and the Museum of Fine Arts Boston (11 months) before I began my training in Glasgow at the Centre for Textile Conservation and Technical Art History.

My decision to go to Glasgow was not an easy one. I admit that I am first a Buffalo Girl, and while there is an art conservation program in my hometown, I found the idea of training there limiting. The Centre for Textile Conservation and Technical Art History opened in Glasgow in 2010, the year I graduated from college. It caught my attention when I was researching conservation training programs for textiles.

I applied to the graduate programs at Buffalo, WUDPAC, and Glasgow. I was accepted to the program in Glasgow, but was rejected from both American programs. This forced me to decide between going abroad for a specialty I knew I wanted or wait another year and continue pre-program training. The conservators I worked with and who I looked up to advised American training which followed their own experience. I eventually chose to attend the Glasgow program because it was well-respected within the specialty and I wanted to begin school, to reduce the financial burden of volunteering, and advance my career. While I felt I would need to work hard to maintain my contacts in the US, I hoped I had a strong enough network from my pre-program work to help with reintegration after my graduate training.

To ensure I had a strong base to return to the US, I worked on projects in graduate school that were multi-media in nature which helped to enhance my skills in research and networking with the international conservation community. My major summer placement was at Oxford’s Pitt Rivers Museum where I worked with organic and ethnographic collections. As my primary placement, it lasted 8 weeks and took place in the summer between my first and second year. I also made sure to maintain contact with American conservators. A supplementary placement that same summer at the Cleveland Museum of Art allowed me to go to the 2013 AIC annual conference to strengthen my network of American colleagues

I was incredibly lucky to have met a private conservator before my departure to the UK who was thrilled by my choice to train across the pond, as she had. She encouraged me to contact her when I finished school. This relationship, which I fostered throughout my training via email and updates, led to me coming back to the US with a job. After graduation, I spent nine months working under her, which was invaluable for my transition into the American conservation community by working with a European-trained American practitioner. Before the end of my first year back in the US, I moved Denver to take my current position as the Andrew W. Mellon Fellow in Textile Conservation at the Denver Art Museum.

What were the advantages of your program of choice: Personal/Professional 

I am a proud alumna of the University of Glasgow Centre for Textile Conservation and Technical Art History. My time abroad gave me incredible opportunities and helped me to grow both personally and professionally in ways that would have not been possible had I stayed within the US.

Professionally, the training program’s committed focus in textile conservation means students have the opportunity to work with a number of different objects within the medium. The textile specialty is surprisingly all encompassing since metal, paper, and plastics are often incorporated. While Glasgow only taught textiles, there were times when materials showed up that forced me to consult outside the Centre and do expansive research into materials. The interdisciplinary nature of the objects encouraged networking, discussion, and research to ensure a treatment was safe and effective. It has made me much more self-driven to find answers as they were never right down the hall.

My time in Glasgow gave me the opportunity to meet colleagues from Japan, Australia, Poland, and around the UK. We approached things differently, whether that came from experiences, culture, or past training. Seeing how other people react to the same object makes you think a bit more broadly and helps keep an open mind. These subtle cultural differences don’t always make a conference paper; they are softer aspects of approach that enhance my thought process and evolve my practice. Despite international distances, we still remain in contact, and they help keep my mind open to different approaches and traditions.

Personally, studying abroad was one very effective way to take this small-town girl out of her comfort zone. As a rather extreme introvert, this move was double the challenge: it took away my ability to drive home every day or on a long weekend, and it stripped away my support system completely. I now know that embracing the challenge to move and meet new people can form wonderful relationships. At the same time, I also know what I can do alone, and that is incredibly empowering.

Being abroad has advantages. I travelled in Spain, Germany, the Netherlands, and throughout the UK. Seeing the world is a wonderful thing, and I learned so much from spending time in other countries, struggling with language barriers, seeing art I’d only seen in books, and  . I have become more aware of this upon my return to the US and working with European curators and colleagues. I was surrounded by the British ways of speaking and writing and absorbed them into my own approach. I am aware of how sometimes a desire or goal can be stated in a very indirect way. It is an incredibly subtle shift that, until you are immersed in it, is rather difficult to comprehend or even recognize until you are placed back into the blunt American world.     Knowing this and learning how to temper

yourself and gauge the world that you are in is an invaluable skill.

I lived my first year in the dorms in Glasgow, which was a strangely brilliant decision that has led to wonderful friendships with English and Business students from India and Pakistan. These women opened my eyes and challenged my thinking, which truly broke me out of my American bubble. It also helps to have someone look at you as if you were crazy and laugh hysterically when you explain that you just spent the day washing Baron Lister’s underpants. It was a good reminder that 100% conservation focus is not 100% healthy.

 

What were the disadvantages of your program of choice: Personal/Professional

The US and the UK training programs are different; this is a fact and should not be overlooked. In overly general terms when American schools are discussed, Winterthur is seen as more scientific, Buffalo excels at bonding students to objects, and NYU teaches the conservator as an Art Historian. In Glasgow, I was bound to textiles and that tradition from day one. Old repairs and work on these objects was often undertaken because they were utilitarian, or the ‘skill’ needed to make the repair was something most women had. While this aspect permeates other specialties, in textiles it is the norm. They require extensive knowledge and skill in that base craft to conserve. A single specialty program, though it produced a conservator with a narrow focus, crafted the defined skill set that is needed for the work

The greatest challenge professionally is coming back to the US with a limited network. I cannot tell you how many times I have picked up my phone and wished I could call on a classmate for their opinion or to draw from a shared experience. The other disadvantage is that Glasgow’s program is two years, which really cannot be compared to American training programs. I did not have the generalized first year nor the final-year internship. I have been told I was not looked at as a candidate until after I was in the US for a year, which was considered the equivalent of filling out my training. This was my experience and not everyone’s, so there are cases where that lack of internship is a non-issue.

The hardest aspect of coming back to the US is the reproach I have felt for my choice to train abroad. I have been questioned as to why I chose Glasgow and not a US program. It can be incredibly shocking when someone questions your training choice, and I have often taken this personally, for good or for bad. As I said earlier, I stand behind my training decision: it fit me and my background and challenged me in areas that I see as my most obvious weaknesses. I find explaining that to someone is difficult, and it’s often hard to avoid appearing defensive.

Personally, I found the disadvantages came in the form of the time difference and distance. Being abroad for two years meant that I did not go home often. I was in the US for 6 weeks one summer, and I spent 48 hours with my family during those six weeks. I missed my family, I lost contact with friends, I missed a number of major life events. While we live in a global environment today, knowing what’s happening in your home country is different than living in your home country.

Financially, the decision to go abroad was not easy. Admittedly I had a lot of help from my family, which is not something everyone has. European programs are not funded in the same way as most American training programs and a $30,000 – $50,000 debt is not something that should be taken on lightly. I was able to get assistance through the University and the Centre’s Foundation, which paid for about half of my tuition. As an American, I was not eligible for many of the funds that my classmates were, which made it harder for me to find outside sources of funding. However, I did not exhaust all avenues in that search because I had support. I know there are financial opportunities out there, but the deadlines are easily missed, and many just did not apply to foreign students.

What advice do you have for pre-programmers considering a similar path?

My choice to study abroad was a deeply personal one. It was not undertaken lightly or without knowing the challenges that could arise. I strongly believe that this choice should not be judged or considered as a way to get out of the requirements of the American programs, and it should not be thought of as an easy way into the field. I feel my choice to attend a foreign program in conservation is a testament to my strength, perseverance, and knowledge of myself and my goals.

My advice is simple: Know what you want and be confident in your choice. Self-doubt is inevitable in this field as we struggle to find jobs or make ends meet, so don’t add your own distrust of your training. You need to know or expect the cost—monetary and personal—and be sure you are set to carry that weight. Don’t rush, it will feel like the end goal is grad school, but enjoy your pre-program experiences. Explore things; don’t block yourself off out of fear or lack of knowledge. Be your best advocate; form relationships and maintain them. You will struggle, no matter the choice, because graduate school is meant to be challenging and the first few years working in the field offer their own trials. However, if this is your passion, if you wake up and cannot imagine yourself doing anything else, then those challenges and struggles are completely worth it.