I find it hard to keep overview over the notations for sets of polynomials, evaluations of polynomials, and extensions of rings and so on.
Let $R$ be a ring, and $E/R$ an extension of $R$.
Occasionally one finds definitions like this
$$\boxed{R(\alpha) = \{ a_0 + a_1\alpha\ |\ a_i \in R\}}$$
for a specific number $\alpha \in E/R$ , i.e. $R(\alpha) \subseteq E/R$ is another set of numbers, for example in Lemmermeyer's Quadratische Zahlkörper:
On the other side, the ring of polynomials over $R$ is defined by
$$\boxed{R[X] = \{a_0 + a_1X + \dots + a_nX^n\ |\ n \in \mathbb{N}, a_i\in R\}}$$
with a unspecific variable $X$, i.e. $R[X]$ is a set of "open" algebraic expressions.
With
$$\boxed{R^k[X] = \{a_0 + a_1X + \dots + a_kX^k\ |\ a_i\in R\}}$$
one can write
$$\boxed{R[X] = \bigcup_{k=0}^{k< \infty}R^k[X]}$$
Next to $R[X]$ we find the definition of
$$\boxed{R(X) = \Big\{ \frac{P}{Q}\ |\ P, Q \in R[X], Q \neq 0\Big\}}$$
If $R[X]$ is a set of algebraic expressions (with a variable $X$), $R[\alpha] = R[X \rightarrow \alpha]$ is a set of numbers by setting the variable $X$ to the numerical value $\alpha$:
$$\boxed{R[\alpha] = \{a_0 + a_1\alpha^1 + \dots + a_n\alpha^n\ |\ n \in \mathbb{N}, a_i\in R\}}$$
or
$$\boxed{R[\alpha] = \{P(X\rightarrow \alpha)\ |\ P \in R[X]\}}$$
Accordingly:
$$\boxed{R[\alpha] = \bigcup_{k=0}^{k < \infty}R^k[\alpha]}$$
Occasionally:
$$\boxed{R[\alpha] = R^1[\alpha] = R(\alpha)}$$
e.g. for $R = \mathbb{Q}$, $\alpha=\sqrt{2}$ (more generally: $\alpha = \sqrt{d}$, $d$ square-free). [Thanks to user Servaes.]
Things would be easier if a consistent notation was used, especially $R^1[\alpha]$ instead of $R(\alpha)$ for the set $\{ a_0 + a_1\alpha\ |\ a_i \in R\}$.
Finally, there is one notation I'm desperately missing: for the minimal extension of a ring $R$ that contains all roots of a polynomial $P(X) \in R[X]$:
$$\boxed{R\langle P\rangle = R[\rho_1]\dots[\rho_k]}$$
for the roots $\rho_i$ of $P(X)$, i.e. $P(\rho_i) = 0$. It's essential (or isn't it?) that
$$\boxed{R[\rho_1]\dots[\rho_k] = R[\pi(\rho_1)]\dots[\pi(\rho_k)]}$$
for any permutation $\pi$ of the roots.
Note that $\mathbb{Z}[\frac{1}{2}]$ is an infinite-dimensional vector space over $\mathbb{Z}$ (with base $\{1,\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{4},\frac{1}{8},\dots\}$, while $\mathbb{Z}^1[\sqrt{2}] = \mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{2}] $ is a two-dimensional one (with base $\{1,\sqrt{2}\}$) - like $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{-1}]$ (with base $\{1,i\}$)!
My question is:
Are there attempts to unify (= optimize) notation in the context of polynomials, evaluation of polynomials, and extensions of rings and fields that minimize confusion (that occasionally arises with established notation)?
The definitions of $R(\alpha)$, $R[\alpha]$ an $R^k[\alpha]$ you give are all unambiguous and in widespread use (though $R_k[\alpha]$ is also used for the latter), so there is no ambiguity or possibility of confusion to be prevented. Note that in your particular case of a squarefree integer $m$ we have $$\Bbb{Q}(\sqrt{m})=\Bbb{Q}[\sqrt{m}]=\Bbb{Q}^1[\sqrt{m}],$$ hence the notation is entirely consistent.
As for the minimal extension containing all roots of a polynomial; I've often seen the notation $\Omega_P^R$ used in the context of field theory, but I guess it works just as well for rings.