Students’ core conceptual understanding has become an important learning target for constructing scientific basic knowledge in the STEM program. Science educators have worried about how to evaluate students’ understanding levels effectively with different alternative choices, by which they could facilitate cognitive performances and improve their learning effectiveness (Bell, 2007). The best encounter of conceptual understanding is in creating an environment of possible choice items via the major pathway to conduct students’ different thinking levels (Neumann, Viering, & Boone, 2013). For example, there are some low performing students who rely on rote memorization without target conceptual understanding to comprehend abstract and complicated chemical phenomena (Grove, Hershberger, & Bretz, 2008). They may not develop mental cognition to understand chemical knowledge sufficiently and fail to pass university-level general chemistry exams (Bhattacharyya & Bodner, 2005; Ferguson & Bodner, 2008). The use of ordered multiple-choice (OMC) was not a readily defined category of conceptualization, nor was its discussion and understanding limited to STEM program aspects. Serving initially as an assessment tool for models of students’ cognitive development, the unique feature of OMC items could be linked to discover students’ responses of core understanding levels in choice items. Researchers have observed students’ understanding levels to build-up individual cognitive skills and construct multiple educational perspectives for effective test items in chemistry learning. Hadenfeldt et al. (2013) developed students’ conceptual understanding levels as an approach for logical reasoning instrument in many university chemistry courses. Briggs and Alonzo (2009) integrated OMC items to elicit individual responses to appropriate understanding levels, and to analyze students’ developmental insights for more elaborate perspective. From OMC item choices to individual cognitive performance, students’ responses of concept understanding levels dominate the most crucial and substantial factors in evaluating students’ concept responses, also provide an overview of corresponding particular models to investigate the validity of the OMC results (Briggs et al., 2006; Hadenfeldt et al., 2013; Özmen, 2013). King-Dow Su Hungkuo Delin University of Technology, Taiwan & Chung Yuan Christian University, Taiwan Abstract. This research focuses on students’ 5 hierarchical levels of Ordered Multiple-Choice (OMC) items for their extensive conceptualized understanding in the particulate nature of matter (PNM) chemistry. The basic framework for OMC items is to link students’ conceptual understanding levels with possible cognitive responses. Developed as the substantial learning perspective, OMC item approaches benefit students with dominant formulations in directing a new impetus on individual mental constructions. This research attempts to establish the validity and reliability through assessing students’ understanding levels. The main methodology of innovative OMC design manifests students’ verified responsive accumulations; with 5 hierarchical mental conceptualizations from naive understanding up to complete systemic PNM understanding. OMC findings offer students more choices to determine the most appropriate corresponding answer towards different conceptualization levels and to set their individual responses at the medium understanding levels. All contribution of this research gives students’ future perspectives in more collaborative engagements with further administering OMC items.

中文翻译：

---

在学生的层次理解水平中订购多项选择项目的可行指南

学生对核心概念的理解已成为STEM项目科学基础知识构建的重要学习目标。科学教育者担心如何通过不同的选择来有效评估学生的理解水平，从而促进认知表现并提高他们的学习效率（Bell，2007）。概念理解的最佳相遇是通过引导学生不同思维水平的主要途径创造可能选择项目的环境（Neumann，Viering，＆Boone，2013）。例如，有一些表现不佳的学生依靠死记硬背而没有目标概念理解来理解抽象和复杂的化学现象（Grove、Hershberger 和 Bretz，2008 年）。他们可能无法发展出充分理解化学知识的心理认知，并且无法通过大学水平的普通化学考试（Bhattacharyya & Bodner, 2005; Ferguson & Bodner, 2008）。有序多项选择 (OMC) 的使用不是一个容易定义的概念化类别，其讨论和理解也不限于 STEM 项目方面。最初作为学生认知发展模型的评估工具，OMC 项目的独特特征可以联系到发现学生对选择项目核心理解水平的反应。研究人员观察学生的理解水平，以建立个人的认知技能，并为化学学习中的有效测试项目构建多种教育视角。哈登费尔特等人。(2013) 发展学生的概念理解水平，作为许多大学化学课程中逻辑推理工具的方法。Briggs 和 Alonzo (2009) 整合了 OMC 项目，以引发个人对适当理解水平的反应，并分析学生的发展见解以获得更详细的观点。从 OMC 项目选择到个体认知表现，学生对概念理解水平的反应在评价学生概念反应的最关键和实质性因素中占主导地位，也提供了相应的特定模型的概述，以调查 OMC 结果的有效性（Briggs et al .，2006 年；Hadenfeldt 等人，2013 年；厄兹曼，2013 年）。King-Dow Su Hungkuo Delin Technology University of Technology, Taiwan & Chung Yuan Christian University, Taiwan Abstract. 本研究侧重于学生的有序多项选择 (OMC) 项目的 5 个层次级别，以帮助他们对物质的颗粒性质 (PNM) 化学进行广泛的概念化理解。OMC项目的基本框架是将学生的概念理解水平与可能的认知反应联系起来。作为实质性学习的视角，OMC 项目方法使学生受益于主导公式，以指导个人心理建设的新动力。本研究试图通过评估学生的理解水平来确定其效度和信度。创新OMC设计的主要方法论体现了学生经过验证的响应积累；具有从幼稚的理解到完整的系统性 PNM 理解的 5 个分层心理概念化。OMC 的发现为学生提供了更多的选择，以针对不同的概念化水平确定最合适的相应答案，并将他们的个人回答设置在中等理解水平。这项研究的所有贡献都为学生在进一步管理 OMC 项目的更多协作参与中提供了未来的前景。