In my experience, nah. I've never really written a poem for which there was one right interpretation, in fact I wait to see what the audience thinks before fully deciding what a poem is about. (There have been exceptions, but those were too subjectively focused to possibly be "correctly" interpreted by someone who didn't know me– maybe even someone who did.)
This is my artistic philosophy: there's not a right way to interpret a poem. I think art is about the interaction between creator and audience, a synthesis of their minds: the audience takes what is in front of them and interprets it subjectively, based on their own background. So I guess technically there's a "wrong" way to interpret, particularly when serving an agenda through art, but I don't think there's a "right" one. The artist could not have created something with only one interpretation, because audience members A and B are bringing totally different ideas to the table. This is just what I think, though, my artist friends all think something subtly different.
I don't think there's anything wrong with studying technique, though– and I don't want to imply I don't use technique. But I often do it without knowing why. I juxtapose two words because I find the combination compelling. As a poet, I am a small child. On the other hand, there's a lot I do consciously. And I think there's a lot Frost does consciously. We can't know for certain which bits he did, of course, but it's worth assuming– especially in a class, where you're seeing what you can learn from him– that a lot of it was conscious.