May I ask a follow up question? What exactly is the point of a multiple choice question in history? It just seems to involve memory rather than interpretation or- like- doing history...?

There will be a substantial amount of writing involved in a history major. I only minored in history, and through word-of-mouth and studentsreview was able to target classes which were mostly multiple choice or short answer examinations, but I still had to write a number of papers. Upper level courses for history majors will involve significant writing.

I am a history major, and this (now last, thankfully :D) semester I took three history courses, all 3000 level which are considered to be upper level courses. Between them I wrote nine essays which varied in length from four to ten pages, with the average being around five pages, and I'd say the course load for each was pretty standard. If you major in history you will have to write a lot, and write well. Undergraduate courses are for the most part pretty easy (at least the ones I've taken) but if you can't stand writing I can't recommend it.

If you expect to do any kind of university level work outside of very select sciences, you should make learning to write a focus.

You don't specify what about writing you struggle with. It doesn't appear to be grammatical as your question here is competently written. Beyond that, do you know if you struggle with structure (you have ideas but can't clearly articulate or argue them) or analysis (you can articulate, but cannot think of anything to write)?

History as an undergraduate university subject is less about knowing what happened, but how and why. Content knowledge is important, but usually taken as given. What you must be able to do is understand how it fits together and articulate your understanding. At the undergraduate level, particularly in the earlier years, this largely means relying on lecture and reading content to make your arguments.

For example, if the lecturer spends a lot of time telling you about specifically mentioned reasons for the fall of the Roman Empire, he or she will expect you to be able to remember the various arguments made and then put those arguments, or one of them, into a long-form answer (exam) or short paper (course work). In both of these kinds of writing, you can easily employ a 1-2-1 or 1-3-1 structure (intro with a thesis, three arguments, conclusion). What you must be able to do is organise your thoughts within that structure.

"Explain why x theory is weak" might be one open ended kind of question that requires you to come up with an overarching thesis and give a few clear supporting arguments based on the reading you have done, and a conclusion.

I took that same AP exam. It was substantially easier in terms of amount of work required, but I think graded rather differently than a university course, where the ability to produce written answers with reasonable answers--usually those that are based on the content of the lectures and readings--are central.

I never took a history course at university with a multiple choice question section on an exam, but I did take some early survey courses which had multiple choice quizzes every so often intended to ensure people were keeping up on their reading. These were usually worth something like 5%-15% of the full grade.

One thing I disagree with: every person who uses the internet reads and writes an enormous amount. However, what they are doing is reading conversationally. That will be particularly true of someone who relies on reddit for news and other information. What you should consider doing is seeking out longer form writing on the internet, and then writing longer-form arguments on reddit. Instead of writing a sentence or part of a sentence that states what you believe, try writing a paragraph that methodically supports what you believe.

That is all academic writing is.