Laboratory practicals in life science subjects are traditionally assessed by written reports that reflect disciplinary norms for documenting experimental activities. However, the exclusive application of this assessment has the potential to engage only a narrow range of competencies. In this study, we explored how multiple modes of laboratory assessment might affect student perceptions of learned skills in a life science module. We hypothesized that while a mixture of assessments may not impact student summative performance, it might positively influence student perceptions of different skills that varied assessments allowed them to practice. This was informed by universal design for learning and teaching for understanding frameworks. In our study, in a third-year Bioscience program, written reports were complemented with group presentations and online quizzes via Moodle. Anonymous surveys evaluated whether this expanded portfolio of assessments promoted awareness of, and engagement with, a broader range of practical competencies. Aspects that influenced student preferences in assessment mode included time limitations, time investment, ability to practice new skills, links with lecture material, and experience of assessment anxiety. In particular, presentations were highlighted as promoting collaboration and communication and the quiz as an effective means of diversifying assessment schedules. A key takeaway from students was that while reports were important, an overreliance on them was detrimental. This study suggests that undergraduate life science students can benefit significantly from a holistic assessment strategy that complements reports with performance-based approaches that incorporate broader competencies and allow for greater student engagement and expression in undergraduate modules.