There appears to be a problem in the way students in introductory, nonmajor literature courses read poetry that affects the way they write about it. One widely accepted belief among students is that there is a hidden but identifiable meaning in the poem that they are supposed to discover. The problem with this strategy is that most students lack the contexts of interpretation that most professional critics possess. Reader-response theory seems to provide an acceptable method of analysis because it values the personal associations and themes that readers bring to their reading of a poem. Another approach meriting consideration is the transactional theory, which seeks to integrate the discipline of close reading with the openness of personal response. Although New Criticism deals with elements such as rhyme, rhythm, and repetition, its emphasis on the effects of language may call attention to such devices in excess of what is required for an understanding of the poem. However, semiotics, which treats language as a system of signs, may be the most appropriate method of analysis because it increases students' awareness of the fact that poems consist of something besides the thoughts and feelings of the poet. Ideally, students should learn to articulate their conceptions of what poetry is and how one reads it, and then test those conceptions against their reading experience. (DF)