The super-star phenomena seems to happen in any field where the marginal cost of distribution is very low. I think teaching could be that way just as much as acting or playing basketball - at least as far as educational content delivery. And many other aspects of teaching can be automated or in some way taken care of without the need of a teacher.
I think khan academy is one example of the super-star phenomena in the teaching field.
But for the number of kids (and even adults) in school, it seems like a super-star would have happened earlier, or that there would be more than one super-star, or that the teaching field would mirror the musician or professional athlete or acting fields more closely. (Maybe Barney was a super-star in teaching? Or some other educational kids TV show star? Bill Nye?) Maybe not so much as far as hype goes, but at least as far as competitiveness at the top, and how far ahead the top few are from the rest in income.
So my question is, why doesn't it? Am I missing some point about the super-star phenomena? Or am I overlooking some super-stars in teaching? Etc?